Actual facts to consider about the school district

Thanks go to The Star, Jacob Wagner and Scott Hunter for carrying out the school levy survey and printing the results and comments in the January 19, 2022 edition. Voters need to have factual information to help them decide whether to vote “Yes” or ‘No” on the levy. There are a few comments that were included in the article and a related “Letters from our readers” section that I would like to address.

Ten years ago, after many years (decades?) of our community communicating the need to replace our three aging and unhealthy schools, Sen. Linda Evans Parlette (retired) convinced our state Legislature to grant the district the funds for the required local contribution needed in order to receive the district’s share of state funds available for school construction. The amount of these funds was limited by the state’s projection of the district’s student population to be 550 students in grades K-12 for the foreseeable future and the projected cost-per-square-foot of school construction. Since the new school was being built with no local funding, nothing above what the state would fund could be approved. The district maximized the dollars available, matched some energy conservation grant dollars, optimized the technology in the building, shepherded the construction, minimized draws on the construction contingency fund and was, at the end of the construction project, able — with state approval — to do some upgrading to the tennis courts, replace the roof on the LRHS Gym and redo the exterior of the remaining building. After the construction was completed in 2014, the school district’s enrollment exceeded 700 students. Since we now own the building debt-free, grounds, technology infrastructure, maintenance and upkeep are now our responsibility. The building is now eight years old and a valuable community asset.

The issue of Impact Aid: Our district does receive federal Impact Aid dollars for the limited number of students who attend LR schools AND reside on Tribal, Federal or Federal Trust lands and Native American students who have learning disabilities that impact their ability to thrive in our school. The district receives no dollars (as in $0) for all of the other Tribal, Federal or Federal Trust lands within the district. John Adkins knows this but fails to differentiate when referring to Impact Aid monies the school district receives.

This district also receives no dollars from state-owned lands (like State Parks and Department of Wildlife) nor any dollars from federal PILT (payment in lieu of taxes) funds (which go to individual counties never to be seen again by any of the counties’ junior taxing districts). Add in all of the land that is taxed as “Open Space” and you have the reality that only 1% of the property within the school district boundaries is taxed at its full market value.

To use other district’s that have a large and dependable tax base for comparisons to our district is unreasonable. I would ask John Adkins to find another district like ours — low tax base, no bonded indebtedness, etc. — and then let’s make the comparisons based on total tax levies for school purposes.

This letter is only an attempt to present facts that I know to be true for the district’s voters to consider.