THE PUBLIC MIND: DON'T BE LURED INTO `FAD' OF VOTING FOR PROPOSITION B

To the Editor:

On November 5, 1991, all Missourians will have the opportunity to vote for one of the largest tax increases in Missouri history. Many are going to the polls believing that Proposition B means good education for the state of Missouri. It has become fashionable to think that if you are against Proposition B you are against education. That is the pressure Missouri voters are under when they approach the polls Tuesday.

Most Missourians are for good education and literacy for all but as rational thinking taxpayers they are beginning to read between the lines. They are turning away from the costly glossy ads for Proposition B. Beyond these ads lies the facts that:

In 1982 Missouri voters passed a statewide sales tax for education. Last year this tax brought in $400 Million for Missouri education.

Proposition B is loaded with new programs that will create more paper-pushing bureaucracies with little if any results. Since many of the schools will not receive additional money from Prop. B they will look to other sources (more taxes?) to pay for the new programs that require increased record keeping, etc. At the present time there are 30 underfunded state mandated programs in the state of Missouri.

A 3/8 cent sales tax increase on Missouri taxpayers will be one of the highest in the country with over 4.6 cents on every dollar.

This state sales tax alone does not include local sales taxes. Based on the 1982 -cent sales tax from Prop. C from the year 1989-90, the 3/8-cent increase will bring $301,916,706 in taxes next year or will average $241 per family of four. That same family is already averaging $322 per family from the 1982 Prop. C education sales tax.

An additional 1.5 percent income tax on Missouri corporations will be raised and placed in the "Fund for Economic Growth and Development". Ultimately all taxes raised on corporation taxes will be passed to the taxpayer in the form of higher prices.

There will be an impact on local schools. Local schools will need to increase local administrative personnel to keep up with the demands outlined in the proposition. This means increased operating budgets.

Under the "Choice" aspect of Prop. B (which is not the choice in schools or voucher program) the local school district would have to monitor placement of the students leaving their district for another, resulting in a possible loss of state funds.

The unknown "formula" of Prop. B will end up taking more money for local schools. Thus voters could be asked by their local school district for a property tax increase just to maintain their revenues. The mandated programs that the state funds will not provide for will place a burden of financial need on the local district.

$190 Million of Prop. B will be deposited into the "Higher Education Trust Account (HETA). The first year the money will go to needed building maintenance and repair but the second year the tax money will be increased and go into a specified area of "the plan" that is detailed on pages 4-28 of the proposition. A "Coordinating Board for Higher Education" (CBHE) will be created to be education "czars" for the state colleges and universities.

The CBHE has the power, among others, to:

Decide which colleges, community colleges, and universities both private and public can train future teachers.

Decide where and when there is a duplication of programs in the public institutions and which one shall be cut.

Although funding for the "cut" program will remain, the program will no longer exist.

Create and has a final word over the coordinating plan for higher education for both private and public institutions.

There is no sunset clause on Prop. B and in 10 years or January 1, 2003, the tax will remain but at the will of the legislature will go into a state general fund or be placed back into a trust fund.

Many more vague and ambiguous programs lie in Prop. B all with the premise that big government can solve educational problems. A critical aspect of good education is left out of Prop. B: the local school district. The efforts for good education are directed at the bureaucratic state and federal levels. Most local schools today have countless paper pushers to attempt to stay on top of the endless requirements and regulations in order to retain state and federal funding.

We need to solve problems in our educational system but not with more bureaucratic propositions. Missouri education needs a change but not from fashionable burdensome tax increases that is a financial burden on taxpayers as well as local school districts. We should not be lured into the fad of Prop. B without knowing all the facts.

Julia A. Kridelbaugh

Cape Girardeau

(Editor's note: While the Southeast Missourian is pleased to published letters of all points of views on this issue, and all issues, the accuracy of facts cited by letter writers takes on a heightened importance in the days just before an election. While opinions may differ, the facts should at least be in place and verifiable. The nature and timing of this letter has taxed this requirement. We hope citizens took time to read the complete wording of Proposition B, published twice in this newspaper. We refer you today to charts on Page 4A that tell how the tax revenue will be raised and where the money will be spent.)