Evening journal., 1919-09-26
SCHOOL TAXES HAD
BEEN KEPT TOO Low.
ContInued from Flrst page.

per cent. OF the amount collected. as
his fee. The trustees employed the
teacher, purchased textbooks and sup
plies, made repairs and purchased the
fuel. They enforced NE compulsory
attendance Law. j. IL were enforced.
In the first place, II is notorious fact
that district school elections in sus-
sex county. as IN other parts OF Del
aware, We're farce Theoretically
the people OF a school district elected
lheir school commissioners The tax
payers and school patrons. theoretical
/ ~ TOOK a lively Interest IN their local
school affairs, flOcked 90 The polls on
school election day and selected men
capable Of managing the schools. In
point OF fact. nothing like that TOOK
place. The people didn't elect their
school commissioners. They didn't go
TO The polls. They permitted local
sclf-government, which Is now being
represented as a martyr, to go by de
fault. The new school code has not
killed local elf-goyernment in schOo.
affairs, for the very good reason that
local self-gOyernment in school affairs
was dead beyond resurrection many
years ago, killed by and in the house
OF those who now bcwail lis demise.
Dozens OF school districts may be
ound In this county where not over
five voters appeared on school election
0dy. There are said 10 be instances In
lhis county where the only votes cast
IN school district, were The votes Of
the three commissioners, who voted
for themselves There are Sussex
county men fighting the new school
code upon the ground 10 deprives them
OF the right 90 run their own local
schools. who never attended a district
scnool election in their lives.
In point Of fact, the manner in which
very large number OF the local
school districts were managed under
the old law was about as follows: Five
or six men would elect a board OF
Three commissioners. The men voting
and the commissioners elected were in
terested primarily in but one thng.-and /
that one thing was not good schools /
or the education OF the children OF !
the district. The one thing they We're !
interested in, was low school taxes. As o |
rule, In such districts the cOmmiss toner's I
we're landlords They were not par
ticularly interested I'm the education Of |
the children Of the tenants. II they
wished their own children TO receive |
good education they were able TO /
send them TO "tOwn" schools, and then |
20 college or academy and finally TO /
university.
Consequently, This type Of school
trustees levied 500 lthe minimum un- /
der the old law TO $500 In local taxes, /
added the SiSS which they received /
h.
their school until the money gave out !
sometimes the teacher was a member !
Of the family Of one OF the commits |
sioners. Seldom was the compulsory
attendance law (which was quite as |
drastic law as the present one) en- |
forced, because 10 financially pr0flted |
many landlords who were school trus-
tees 10 keep the children OF tenants
working in the fields. School build |
mas were not repaired Necessary
items Of expense were incurred but,
not paid.
At the end Of the year. under the
old law. the school commissioners the
Oreiically. reported 10 the school cleo
ton meeting. But. as stated before. |
very frequently no one attended these /
meetings, so no report was made. So /
long as no change was made in the /
tax rate, or a fight over a teacher
didn't occur. the school trustees were
permitted to run their school with
out check or question or report.
With what results? Il is now com
ing to light why taxes were so low
in some districts under the old law.
Many school districts simply didn't
pay their debts. They accumulated
deficits. These districts now owe back
pay to teachers, they owe for supplies.
they owe clerks Of the boards who
advanced money out Of their own
pockets. they owe money on notes
neld by banks and individuals, which
notes represent money the school 4
commissioners borrowed. It was cas-
Ter for local trustees to borrow money
and give notes than il was 10 call a
school meeting and get permission o.
raise the tax rate.
Your correspondent went over the
records. They show the financial ar
fairs OF many Of the school districts
to be in a deplorable shape. Here IS a
district neat Delmar, where the trus-
tees kept the tax rate down 60 p
cents: but IL owes one teacher Sii357
back pay, another teacher $50 back
pay, and the clerk s39S3 Here Is an
other district with a tax rate Of p
cents. 10 Is near StOckley. 10 owes its
clerk S5536i. A district near Nassau
kept its tax rate down to II cents. but /,
10 has a deficit Of S325. A district near
Harbeson had a tax rate Of A. cents.
and a deficit OF Si63ii. A district near
Cedar Grove kept its tax rate down to
20 cents. but it is in debt S63i &c. A
district near Milford had a tax rate Of
2i cents. and a deficit OF S33i7. An
other district near Milford kept its
tax rate down to IS cents, and accumu-
lated a deficit Of S2i2. A district near
Georgetown had a rate OF only n
cents, and a deficit Of $3.50 Another
district near Georgetown, with a tax
rate OF 80 cents, accumulated unpaid
debts OF s52s.s5
All told. the school districts OF Sus-
sex county have an accumulation OF
over $4,000 unpaid debts. exclusive Of
bonded indebtedness incurred for
buildings or grounds In other words.
the tax rate. has been kept so low
that not enough money has been raised
10 meet the current expenses OF the
schools, so the local school boards
have borrowed money given notes or
Just let the bills go unpaid. Under The
new code these debts are 10 be paid.
To pay them taxes. must be raised.
Some OF the very men who sat on the
old school boards and incurred these
debts are now lOudest in their de-