Letter: Teachers salaries rebuttal
I guess that I really stirred the pot. It took less than a day for the Roaring Fork School District’s administrators to defend themselves and blatantly point out to me that all of the money that we voted for in the past two school bond issues, by state law, must be used to fund either building projects or the purchase of land for future school buildings.
However, if we decide in the future to raise the mill levy (more property taxes) then there could be a separate vote for teacher salary increases.
So the school administrators have defined their own problem — not a single penny from both $100 million plus school bond issues can be used for increasing teachers salaries. Don’t you think that has to change? It’s broke, fix it; isn’t that part of your job?
Why weren’t the bond issues split up so that there was a mill levy increase in order to compensate the teachers? Obviously, the state needs to realign its spending priorities as well.
For example, I could never understand why Lotto Funds are used for just recreational and environmental purposes; why not use some of those funds for public school purposes as well, like teachers’ salaries?
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.