Letters - Monday
Never enough for schools
In 2000, Coloradans were told that increasing school district revenue by "inflation plus 1 percent" over the next 10 years would solve the education funding problem in Colorado, and voters approved Amendment 23. Now that we're approaching the end of this 10-year period, have we reached our goal?
Well, let's look at two examples. In FY 2000-2001, per pupil General Fund revenue was $5,179 in Lewis-Palmer D-38 and $5,550 in Academy D-20. Using the Amendment 23-mandated algorithm, per pupil General Fund revenue should have grown to at least $6,584 in D-38 and to at least $7,056 in D-20 by FY 2007-2008.
In reality, per pupil General Fund revenue grew much faster in both districts - to $7,311 in D-38 and to $7,591 in D-20 for FY 2007-2008. The difference between the actual and "inflation plus 1 percent" revenue figures amounts to $727 per pupil in D-38 and $535 per pupil in D-20 and represents additional funds provided by taxpayers in excess of the level imposed by Amendment 23.
Yet despite this significant increase in General Fund revenues over and above Amendment 23 levels, both districts asked local taxpayers for additional funds through mill levy override proposals last November ($2.7 million in D-38 and $14 million in D-20).
In addition, D-38 actually spent much more than it received in both FY 2006-2007 (when General Fund expenditures exceeded revenues by $2.2 million) and FY 2007-2008 (when General Fund expenditures exceeded revenues by $2.1 million). And now, the teaching staffs in both districts have been told to expect pay freezes for FY 2009-2010 because of a possible reduction in state funds.
So, how much is enough? Apparently the answer is: "There's never enough."
David Cloud, Monument
Suthers misses the point
In an op-ed recently in The Gazette, former District Attorney John Suthers told us he was protecting the public when he helped incarcerate all these violent offenders that inhabit our prisons ("Sentencing reform idea unworkable," Opinion, May 29). Give me a break.
If Suthers really wanted to protect the public, he wouldn't release sex offenders such as the one they shipped to Missouri, without any strings attached, who admitted to kidnapping, molesting and raping 18 children.
Suthers' claim that only violent offenders inhabit our correctional facilities does not hold up either. People get locked up all the time for traffic offenses such as driving without a license. They get pulled over, get ticketed, their vehicle gets impounded and they have to serve time later in jail.
This is all about revenue enhancement and job security, not to mention the obscene profits raked in by such industries as construction, the phone companies, vendors, the doctor, etc.
A lot of the violence committed by offenders could be avoided if some of the illegal drugs were legalized, and the DEA eliminated. The billions of dollars saved could be redistributed to prisoners upon their release. The recidivism rate would go way down.
Ursula Pearson, Colorado Springs
Who benefits from dealer loss?
I don't understand how closing dealerships across the country is going to save Chrysler or General Motors money and help their finances. The dealerships are owned by individuals who pay franchise fees to Chrysler and GM and who buy cars from Chrysler and GM.
The employees at the dealerships are employees of the dealership, not Chrysler or GM.
Will someone please explain to me how this is to anyone's benefit?
Milton Woodham, Colorado Springs
Not proud of war machine
The Colorado Springs mayor is glad Colorado Springs and Colorado tops the list for our war machine ("State of the City: Mayor says Springs faces tough decisions," The Gazette, June 2). I am not.
Peace comes from embracing the other, not making war on her or him.
In 1946-1947, my family planted corn and soy beans at the Iowa ordnance plant. It used to make nukes and still makes other weapons of war for the military industrial complex and politicians.
Our farming added more to the well-being of America and the world. So would closing our war bases and having community gardens.
Howard Johnson, Lake George
Apuan walks the walk
This is a reply to Dennis Moore, Kit Roupe and others who say Rep. Dennis Apuan hasn't answered the question about how Fort Carson feels about the Piñon Canyon expansion.Folks, he did answer it loud and clear. He voted against the bill. What more do you all want? If that is not standing up for District 17 constituents, what is?
I know Apuan as a person. He is decent, he has honor and will not lie or spin fantastic tales, unlike others. Lies and half-lies is what is wrong with my Republican Party.
Fools and adulterers lie within my Republican Party. Until these types are tossed, we will not regain power.
Apuan, Republican or Democrat, was the best hope for District 17. The people saw and voted. The best person won.
I'm a registered Republican, senior citizen and retired Army disabled Vietnam combat veteran. I don't just vote for the party, I vote for the person who can best serve the people. Enough of the spinning on Apuan; he is doing a good job.
George Hutton, Colorado Springs
