Should SPLOST be used for any part of annual operating expense of the Hall County School System?

     I oppose any taxation that is not essential and I oppose all taxes that are not fairly distributed. In my view, consumption taxes are among the fairest there are and special purpose local option sales taxes (SPLOST) are consumption taxes. On the other hand, property taxes, especially when they support services for property owners and non-property owners alike, are among the least fair. Of course, even worse is a graduated income tax system, but that is for another day.
     From data available online, of about $342 million in educational SPLOST I, II, & III funds over 15 years for Hall County, about 21% went to upkeep/upgrades for existing schools, including technology and other equipment and furnishings, as well as improvements to extracurricular facilities. That is about $1.4 million per year.
     It was reported at the June 5 Hall County School board that the operating funds for the school board were as much as $25 million, around 8%, less than they were four years ago with a student population 700 more today than then.  The entire SPLOST collection, at about $23 million per year, would be needed to replace this variance each year.
     This means no funds to pay off existing debt, construct permanent classroom space, including new school construction and associated land acquisition, build school additions, complete renovations and repairs to related items such as library books, furniture roofs, HVAC systems, floors and security systems. While finding ways to pay for essential school operations cannot be ignored, neither can the purposes for which the electorate approved the SPLOST.
     With only two-third of those voting approving the SPLOST IV, future SPLOSTs that including operating expenses as an intended purpose are unlikely, regardless of my support. This brings me to the crux of the issue, I absolutely favor identifying and removing wasteful spending in the school system, if any. I also favor determining efficiencies that may reduce costs as well. But after that, we have an obligation to give our children the education they need for life and work. If we could come up with a better method of funding for K through 12 education I would wholeheartedly approve of a state constitutional amendment to make the change. For instance, lottery money contributes to Pre-K now and that certainly makes a differences.