Winston Churchill once said that "democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others." Likewise, the April 4 propositions to fund a second public high school in Jefferson City and to renovate the current high school, in many people's minds, are less than perfect.
But we believe the tax hike would fund a solid plan that is needed to keep our schools, and our community, vibrant in the future.
Voters inside the Jefferson City school district on April 4 will see two propositions for the schools:
Proposition J would increase the property tax rate by 65 cents per $100 of assessed property, raising $130 million to renovate the current high school and construct a new one. It requires 57 percent approval.
Proposition C would increase the property tax rate by 45 cents per $100 of assessed property. Of that, a little more than half would be used for operating costs of a second high school and 20 cents would cover operating needs within the existing school system. Proposition C requires a simple majority to pass.
We concede, the plan isn't perfect. The failed 2013 plan to build a single large replacement high school also wasn't perfect. And if voters shoot down the current plan, you can bet the next plan won't be perfect either.
We've heard many reasons for opposition to Propositions J and C:
The plan is too expensive, particularly for state workers whose earnings haven't kept up with inflation and seniors on fixed incomes.
We agree, the plan is pricey. But even with the property tax increase, our property tax rate still would be comparable to other area cities - and less than our neighbors in Columbia.
It doesn't address overcrowding at East Elementary School, which has been ignored for too long.
East Elementary does need attention. But it recently got a $3.4 million update, and the school board has redrawn boundary lines that will decrease the school's population by 66 students. The school board has also pledged to seek funding for a second elementary school on the east side in 2021 or 2022.
The school district has faced criticism in recent years for everything from age discrimination (which resulted in two lawsuits) to administrators not backing up teachers on discipline measures. During that time, the school board/district gained a reputation for lacking trust and transparency.
The district has taken major steps to regain its reputation, including replacing the superintendent, high school principal and others.
Residents on the west end would get to send their children to the new high school, while east-end residents would have to put their children in the renovated (read: old) high school.
The district has assured the public that the new and current high schools won't create a case of the "haves and have nots," and the architectural drawings have a similar style that bears this out. For some, the fear is that even if the schools start out as equal, there will be an erosion of quality or at least a perception of poorer quality at one school. But, if we look at how the district has managed its two middle school programs, the district has been able to maintain a level playing field for middle school students on separate ends of town.
Some of the above criticisms are more valid than others. But all of them combined don't outweigh the big picture, which is the need for more space and modernization of facilities at the high school level.
Since 2001, Simonsen and JCHS have been operating at 95 percent capacity or higher every year. For Simonsen, enrollment for 14 of those 16 years has been over capacity for the building (632, according to ACI Boland architects). For JCHS, enrollment has surpassed capacity 10 out of 16 years.
Not doing anything is no longer an option. Even if the forecasts of larger student enrollments don't come to fruition, operating at or above capacity doesn't create a conducive learning environment for students or teachers.
Superintendent Larry Linthacum capsulized the reason we should all be willing to make this investment in our future: "We do believe a rising tide raises all ships."
Throwing money at a problem isn't always the solution. But in this case, better funding will result in better schools. Better schools will result in a better community, one that props up property values and encourages companies to locate here.
To ensure the future vibrancy of our city, we urge voters to approve both Propositions J and C.
Editor's note: Please continue sending your letters to the editor on the school issue to [email protected], whether you support or oppose it. To ensure your letter is printed before the April 4 election, please make sure we have it by this Thursday, March 30. In addition to your name and address, be sure to include your phone number for verification purposes only.
And read what our readers have said about this issue here: Community voices on the JCPS ballot issues.