As both a citizen
of Cuyahoga Falls and a public school educator, I would like to thank Donald Lancy for the time and energy he spent considering new ways to fund public education ("Offers new funding idea for schools," Aug. 14 Falls News-Press, Page 9).
The magnitude of the problem and current gridlock in Columbus and Washington suggest that we will need creative solutions based on ideas like Mr. Lancy's.
That said, I would like to encourage everyone to consider the following. First, to Mr. Lancy's point that "there are people who live in condos and apartment complexes that pay no school taxes," landlords certainly pay school taxes using rents collected from their tenants.
Second, like Mr. Lancy, I have no children in school. However, I am willing to support public education because someone else supported me when I was school age and because I want competent doctors to keep me healthy, engineers to keep me safe, and so on. Pay-for-your-own-kid-only systems are never equal, magnify generational poverty, and are absolutely against the American Dream.
Third, I empathize with Mr. Lancy's concern that so much of his house taxes (46.37 percent, he wrote) are headed to a single budget item. Nearly the same percentage of my take-home pay is applied to student loans (and I went to a public university).
Lastly, "the amount of money added to vehicles' license tags versus savings of school taxes by homeowners is," not a "no-brainer," as Mr. Lancy suggested. It is absolutely a "brainer" that requires knowledge of the total tax revenue applied to school funding compared to the amount of vehicles that would require registration multiplied by $25. My suspicion is that they are not even close.
Perhaps we should consider how low, middle, and fixed-income citizens do not receive the same tax breaks as our wealthiest neighbors and companies. Maybe they could kick in 25 bucks?
David Thompson, Cuyahoga Falls