How in the world did StP voters okay the education tax??? (St. Paul: layoffs, school districts)

[Govie]

I know we residents aren't this delusional. So what gives? This was clearly a waste of money during trying times. I don't see this.

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Some ppl support education I guess.

[Camden Northsider]

Yeah, I can't believe the voters in St. Paul would support something so unimportant and wasteful as education... IDIOTS! Clearly there's a gap in local education if voters are stupid enough to support something like this...oh wait...never mind I guess.

[Family of five]

The referendum was mostly a renewal of funds - not asking for addtional funds. 75% of the referendum was a renewal, so if it hadn't passed then that would have been a very serious setback for many schools. It would have meant many teacher layoffs and greater numbers of students in the classrooms. Also, most of the ECFE budget is in the renewal part of the referendum. ECFE's budget would have been gutted, and as a St. Paul resident in our family's 9th year of ECFE this would have been very hard for me and the hundreds of other ECFE families to bear. I am grateful that most St. Paul residents recognized the importance of the referendum!

[GBCommenter]

I wasn't following this issue and really don't have a dog in that race, but my hope would be that St. Paul voters (and all voters, for that matter), not simply blindly vote for a tax continuation/increase simply because the district pleads poverty and/or "won't someone PLEASE think of the children!?" Critical questions should be asked as to how the money is being spent and if there were better ways to spend money, as opposed to a simplistic rationale of "oh, it's for 'education' so blindly throwing money into the hole simply must be good no matter what".

That said, the voters of St. Paul made their decision and, as one politician has mentioned - "elections have consequences". May those consequences be ones the City of St. Paul and its citizens can live with...

[Squeamish]

Why do we need an extra tax in addition to the normal taxes to fund what sounds like is basic essential school services? shouldn't that be part of normal taxes? If we quit wasting so much money on unnecessary things like the military, this wouldn't be a problem. They're simply disguising a tax increase as something they expect voters to want. And they were right. The voters went for it. I voted no.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Squeamish

Why do we need an extra tax in addition to the normal taxes to fund what sounds like is basic essential school services? shouldn't that be part of normal taxes? If we quit wasting so much money on unnecessary things like the military, this wouldn't be a problem. They're simply disguising a tax increase as something they expect voters to want. And they were right. The voters went for it. I voted no.

I'm confused...you think the money they wanted was for basic/essential services and that the military hogs up too much money. So you voted against the measure? Doesn't that seem...silly? If my problem was that the military hogs too many resources, I'd be going after them rather than voting down a school levy.

[citylivin]

Originally Posted by xandrex

I'm confused...you think the money they wanted was for basic/essential services and that the military hogs up too much money. So you voted against the measure? Doesn't that seem...silly? If my problem was that the military hogs too many resources, I'd be going after them rather than voting down a school levy.

I'm as confused as you are as well. Same with the ones who voted, "yes" to the marriage amendment because they believed in, "Freedom!"

[pete6032]

Originally Posted by Squeamish

Why do we need an extra tax in addition to the normal taxes to fund what sounds like is basic essential school services? shouldn't that be part of normal taxes? If we quit wasting so much money on unnecessary things like the military, this wouldn't be a problem. They're simply disguising a tax increase as something they expect voters to want. And they were right. The voters went for it. I voted no.

Military funding is from the federal budget, school funding is from the local/state budget.

[GBCommenter]

Originally Posted by pete6032

Military funding is from the federal budget, school funding is from the local/state budget.

Obviously correct, and aside from that point some might find the military useful to have around should a foreign army start landing on our shores uninvited. It also so happens to actually have some Constitutional authority to exist as a legitimate function of government.

That said, my primary hope is people are actually critically thinking about what is a legitimate expense of local government/school district. It is all too easy to demogogue on the issue and say things like "if you don't vote for more taxes, it means you hate children, schools, and their future - you want to entrench people into poverty!"

Education is good and important, but that doesn't mean school districts get a free pass on watching the bottom line.