Truth in Advertising

The Franklin County School Board's contemplation of setting aside a half-mill in property tax collections for employee raises should be labeled what it is - a tax increase.

While board members bend over backwards to call a 1.5 millage rate for capital outlay - down from the current 2.0 - a reduction balanced by setting aside dollars for teacher raises and benefits they are effectively parsing the words to avoid being called on the action.

As stated in a recent story in this paper, the 1.5 mills in capital outlay dollars represents what is needed to meet bond payments to pay down the cost of construction for the consolidated school.

The 2.0 mills the School Board has been levying for capital outlay the past few years is the maximum under statute, and significantly higher than that levied five or six years ago, so board members should be applauded for moving to cut back in the one area of the public school budget where the local board can impact.

It is important to remember that school taxes are unlike any other in local government.

Essentially, school funding is cut up into four components, three of which are set by lawmakers in Tallahassee.

The required local effort - that amount local taxpayers must pay for the district to receive any state funding, which has been steadily rising this decade - is the largest component, with discretionary funding, both basic and supplemental, based on student enrollment and largely tied to day-to-day operations.

So it is only in capital outlay spending that a local school board has any real say.

And while shaving capital outlay funding is a good thing, asking voters to approve a half-mill for employee salaries and benefits is not a wash; it is a tax increase, particularly in the light of where the millage was before the move toward consolidation.

This is not to dismiss teachers and non-instructional employees, but is to argue that from this corner the district's position is about five or six years too late in being formed.

There are valid reasons why the district should be ensuring that teachers and all employees are paid at appropriate levels and have benefits to match.

Teachers, non-instructional staff, and their well-being, a living wage, decent health and insurance benefits, retirement, should all be paramount.

These are the folks who educate, too often baby-sit, and generally spend nearly as much time with youngsters as those students spend with their own parents, if there are even parents in the picture.

They are the ones who are held responsible by the state for a school's performance on standardized tests and the ones held accountable by parents for their child's progress or lack thereof.

And none of that includes the paperwork involved in being a teacher.

If one wants to ensure the mending of one thread in what is considered community fabric, teachers and school employees are right there at the top of the list.

Likewise, there are plenty of reasons, especially fiscal, that consolidation could prove a valuable step forward for the district, opening opportunities to offer more programs, to bolster existing ones and to bring communities under a common umbrella.

From economies of scale it was a significant move.

And in a county already divided along racial and political lines - what do single member districts offer but boundary lines - such an effort is not to be scoffed at.

But at a certain point this becomes a chicken-and-the-egg equation.

For improving the overall quality of education in the county should first involve taking care of the troops charged with that task, not new buildings.

The learning happens inside the four walls, any four walls could suffice as history demonstrates, and it is mostly in the hands of the teacher if that learning gets done, not whether they have new computers or the ability for PowerPoint presentations or any other bell and whistle.

Good teachers trump bricks and mortars any day, and had the district put all the energy and focus it has put into consolidation into recruiting and retaining good teachers - a state and national problem - maybe county schools would enjoy a more favorable reputation.

There is an old adage about the road to "heck" being paved with good intentions.

While there are plenty of good intentions behind setting aside a fund for employee raises and benefits maintaining the current burden on taxpayers, if that is how board members wish to couch it, is not the answer.

The answer is living within means, being proactive and having a long-term vision, and making teachers and their livelihoods the top priority to providing a quality education.

New buildings, the consolidated school, are nice, but they never will replace true educators.

That seems a lesson the School Board is a little late in learning.

Should that tardiness be at taxpayer expense?