Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1955-10-10
Toxpdyer's Lament

0Ap4YSs @ssSus
As q Montgomery County
homeowner. Alex K. Hancock's
answer to q gripping taxpayer"
presents quite q challenge to
me and some amusement.
I'm sure gripping taxpayer"
like myself. is grateful for the
privilege Of helping educate
the youth Of America. What
he resents are the inequities
Of the taxpaying system.
Those of us who bought
homes In Montgomery County
IL years ago to raise our chill
dren In q suburban atmos-
phere have seen our taxes
more than double. The influx
OF children In the county Is
largely due to apartment de-
velopments. which have in
turn deprived US Of our sub
urban atmosphere. Apartment
owners do not pay a school tax
In proportion to what Q home-
owner pays.
As for our family. we pay
tuition and transportation to
send our four children to q
parochial school. and still feel
1t q duty and q privilege to ed
ucate those In public schools.
II, however. every apartment
dWelier, with or without chill
dren wss taxed $25 q year for
schools. the entire problem
would be solved. Over and
above the value Of the tax
dollar, the value Of the per-
sonal interest stimulated by
the expenditure would over
come q lot Of the dificulties
facing the school board today.
The cost to the apartment
dweller would be SOC . week.
My school tax this year Is
$14l.95, or $3.50 q week.
Like gripping taxpayer" ]
want to do my share. but ]
don't want to be a goat. ]
have In my IA years here seen
my taxes climb from SIP to
$238.7S, and that does not
cover all the taxes we pay.
Pity the retired man and the
widow on a pension or social
security. who have seen taxes
continue to rise with no pos
sible means to increase their
income.
Mrs. B. 6. Hughes.
I would have to agree with
Mrs. Hughes that there are
inequities in the system Of
supporting education. but Mrs.
Hughes makes q common mis-
take In assuming that apart
ments do not carry q proper
tional amount Of school tax.
DR.. Homer Hoyt came to the
conclusion after comprehen-
sive survey that apartments
come closer to paying their way
than does ordinary residence
property. DR.. Hoyt Is not alone
In that conclusion.
It Is my opinion that the ad
valorem property tax is q
comparatively poor method Of
securing revenue for the sup
port Of anything so expensive
as a modern school system. It
would be much better for all
concerned. If at least q SUBJ
stantial portion Of school oper-
ating costs were betrayed by
direct tuition charge. For those
families who could not afford
the tuition charge. payment
should be made as q welfare
and not as an educational cost.
It seems to me that the tuition
charge is very important be-
cause Of the apparent refusal
of most citizens to realize how
expensive public education has
become.
The public probably Is not
ready to accept. at the present
time. q change to q tuition or
a partial tuition system and II
this cannot be done, 1t is sug-
gested that some other tax.
such as for instance q sales tax,
would be Q much fairer means
Of raising the bulk of revenue
needed for our public school
system.
Mrs. Hughes mentions a
$25 a year tax for schools from
apartment dwellers. Many
States resort to q per capita
tax for school purposes. Such
a tax. however, cannot be used
in Maryland without a consti-
tutional amendment.
Mrs. Hughes recites that her
taxes have climbed from $ll2
to $238.78 in IA years. I SUBJ
init that this increase not
more than offsets the shrink
age in dollar value In that
period. Local taxes have not
climbed as much as many
other expenses and constitute
0 smaller percentage Of aver.
age family income than they
did IL years ago.
! have long recognized thai
rising taxes do constitute