READERS RESPOND REGARDING SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS

In the aftermath of the Oct. 5 election failure of a school improvements package for Cape Girardeau, the second time such an issue has failed, the Southeast Missourian published a clip-and-mail coupon seeking comments on the negative outcome.

Several dozen people responded to our request. What follows are comments offered concerning the first question on the coupon. We publish them basically as submitted, hoping to draw from them something of the reasoning of those who voted against this issue.

In Thursday's edition, we will publish responses to the second question on the coupon. In Friday's edition, we will publish some longer, more detailed commentaries that were submitted in response to the coupon.

As always, we welcome other letters concerning this subject. We would like for this to be just the beginning of the dialogue.

For what reasons did you vote against the Cape Girardeau school issue Tuesday?

We were asked to vote for a building, not a tax increase to increase state funding.

Property tax no. Sales tax yes. Then everyone pays. Cut sports -- too much money is spent on them. Repair our present school building.

The closing of May Greene and Washington schools. The new boundaries need to be known before the election. There was no sunset clause.

Gov. Carnahan's education tax he has imposed on us without a vote.

In the April election, had to pass because schools were unsafe and students and teachers were in danger. What happened to the concern for this election?

Very unfair simply because only the real property owners would be taxed on this increase, not renters.

Lack of trust in the school board; money in the past spent foolishly. Too many administrators; salaries too high, athletic director not needed. Bad planning; not all angles in building looked at.

We will never vote a tax our children will have to pay off.

I am not in favor of Carolyn Kelly's middle-school concept.

The original tax vote was confusing, overpriced and not well thought out. This past election was "too" low key -- almost sneaky. I wanted to "show" the superintendent and school board who's in charge. It is almost like they say, "Shut up and give me the money." Or, "Don't question my motives, I know what's best for your kids."

State and national taxes appear to be on the way up. Because a tax raise seems desirable does not make it necessarily prudent at this time. Voting it down twice should send a fairly clear message.

Tired of higher taxes, misuse of tax money. School system should put priority in right place. Example: School before recreation. System is top-heavy with administrative management.

Because of fixed income, can not pay that much higher taxes.

Negative growth of town and school doesn't justify new buildings. I don't want my kids to be in with eighth graders when they go to sixth grade. Present buildings should be upgraded, not replaced.

School taxes are high enough. Manage better what you have. Sports, number of coaches? Look at each department.

Repair what you have and stop trying to fool old people.

The board promised when we passed the last school tax there would be no increase in salary for the superintendent. We passed the tax and he was immediately given a raise. We remember a broken trust.

Eleven percent of the initial costs was going out of town for professional services, when equally qualified professionals are available locally at less cost.

Check the percent that goes to school; look on my real estate taxes and personal property tax statements.

Too much taxes. Some people would have to choose between food and medicine. Use what money you have to repair Washington and May Greene.

I can not pay more taxes. I am a senior citizen (a widow for 12 years). I live below the poverty level.

Tax increase. School board top-heavy in chiefs and overpaid. Clinton presidency (nationally uncertainty). Renters should also be taxed. No consideration given for taxpayers with children in parochial schools.

Seventy-five percent of taxes go to schools. Too many high-paid salaries. Jackson is building one for $5 million, including land. Not much smaller building.

Cut salaries. Show improvement in students. No pass, no play.

I voted against the school issue because Mr. Clark is not doing a good job. The schools are not serious about cutting costs. Regarding the Washington School principal situation, they planned to eliminate it, then changed their minds. We do not need this extra principal. Also, the board is too wishy-washy. The entire system keeps wanting higher pay, instead of producing. The only thing they think about are salaries.

The proposed school was a bloated, overblown waste of space, poorly designed and improperly presented, and also too expensive. What is wrong with using a local architect?

Because of plans to abandon the two school mentioned, Washington and May Green.

I want to see change and reform, not business as usual. Neyland Clark is a great PR man, however, we need leadership. Get rid of old-times who are viewed in a negative light in the community because of their ineffectiveness. Then a tax increase will pass.

I will not support any increase in property taxes. The school board practically gave away Lorimier School to the city. I am opposed to the middle school.

I don't think the middle school building is as important as an elementary building. Administration is top heavy.

I do not trust our school board and superintendent to listen to the public. They cut programs that hurt my children with no regard to my input, yet they left their pet athletic programs intact. If I give them more money, they will only build palaces and hire more coaches.

I am dissatisfied with the administration.

Many reasons. I am 71, will never be able to work again and make a salary. I own a house and car; should I sell my home and rent? I always vote against every tax on homeowners. I suggest you take better care of what you have, repair, clean, paint, etc. And quit spending taxpayers' money on elections; your school board money is our money.

Gasoline tax up four cents a gallon since Oct. 1. Income tax up retroactive to January 1993. More coming from Washington and Jefferson City.

Because we are tired of all taxes being on homeowners. Find a way to make renters pay their fair share.