Are These Mailings Informational Or Propoganda?

Isn't it interesting that as soon as there's an election, we receive some official looking info in the mail? Is it data, informational, or electioneering? At strategic times, our mailboxes seem inundated with "informational" pieces, often sent by some elected official, organization or other entity. We receive regular reports from our elected officials in the mail, especially in the period leading up to an election. This hotly discussed school budget seems to fall into the same category.

Every so often, we receive official communication from our school administration. The piece is portrayed as an official report of what is occuring with our schools, but often seems to be little more than a propoganda piece. This past weekend, we received our annual official discussion and explanation of the proposed budget, and the reasons it should be approved. Since I am not certain how this mailing is paid for, I am not certain that it is an official document, although there is a column both by the superintendent and the School Board president.  However, if it is funded by the taxpayers, shouldn't this document be a more "fair and balanced" discussion of the budget, as opposed to a piece designed to garner support for the budget itself?

There have been many comments by people on both sides of this budget issue, and unfortunately, it appears, that many of the assumptions made on both sides possess a certain degree of "spin." I have seen several people use the fact that there will be a tax increase whether the budget is passed or not, as a valid defense of the budget itself. Several of these people have even stated that the tax increase will be the same either way, which my reading of a 1.92 percent versus 2.96 percent budget increase would seem not to indicate. However, the reality is that the issue is more about the process, and the continued use of the "children" as pawns. Many well meaning and concerned individuals correctly fear a diminishment of the education; however slightly larger class sizes or saving monies by reducing inefficiencies would not necessarily in any way impact educational quality. Others continue to blame the teachers and/or the administrators for the difficulties, but doesn't every employee strive for the best situation for them personally? Perhaps the most disconcerting comments are by individuals who defend the budget increase by using the convoluted explanation that the monies are needed to maintain educational quality, and that good schools maintain property values, so it would be short-sighted to simply try to cut the school budget. However, have those individuals ever evaluated the impact on property values created by ever-increasing real estate taxes (of which school taxes are by far the single largest component)? Because when taxes are added to mortgage interest and escrow, it creates the monthly carrying charge for a mortgage, and nearly everyone who purchases a house uses a mortgage. The monthly carrying charge, not the actual price of the house, often determines if someone is able to buy a house and qualify for a mortgage.

The issue is that this school budget issue has become a "political football," with there being nearly as much "spin" as fact, and no one appearing satisfied. There has to be a better way of doing this, but we must be willing to explore all alternatives, fight the needed battles, and forget about the status quo. We must say this is the last time this budget will follow this cost plus formula, and in the future only zero- based budgets be used.