Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1963-01-02
School BUDGET Fiuht


If the School Board in
Montgomery County wants
to cut the 1884 budget, it
should do the job itself.
There is no parallel to last
years board action, when the
superintendent was asked to
make cuts in a number of
quality improvements, but
not to touch the salary in
crease--in other words, pri-
critics we're indicated. The
action of the new board
members on December IL APP
peared deliberately provoca-
tive, as have their remarks
to the press since then.
A page by page study of
the budget reveals no pad
ding. In fact, the reverse is
true. In a number of pro-
grams, the failure to increase
services in proportion to the
increase in number of chill
dren means a reduction in
quality This school year we
have lost ground in Mont
gomery County, compared
with 1872, because of the
need to hold back on tax in
creases Tin one of the rich
est counties in the United
States, and the new budget
for 1884 as presented by
the Superintendent, with
out cuts, will leave us even
further behind next year.
The leading research CEN
ter" visualized by the new
County Council president
won't materialize in an area
with marginal schools - ov-
ercrowded high schools, linn
tied school library service,
and other petty penny
pinching proposals. When will
we wake up?
Mr.. and Mrs. Edwin ROedder.
I trust that the intelligent
people of Montgomery Coun-
ty will not be taken in by
the antics of DR.. Whittier
in his vain attempt to in
flame them against the new
members of the school board.
Notably missing from his
reverse priority" list was
the $4,000 item for adult
education. For the nominal
sum of SIS, courses to all
corners are offered in glass
blowing, basket weaving,
Russian, Improvement
etc. Although this is a COM
mendable program, it is diff
ficult to see why it Is sub
sidized rather than self-sus-
tanning. DR.. Whittier would
eliminate the science fair
program at a saving of ST.
600 but makes no mention
Of adult education.
The people of Montgomery,
who issued a clear mandate
against DR.. Whittier at the
polls, should urge the new
members to remove him. He,
along with the three incum-
bent members of the board,
will fight the return to sem
sible government as long as
someone will listen to them.
We can't do anything about
the three incumbents until
1864, but. Mr.. Bell. you can
begin the job by slicing DR..
Whittier right now
Henry. J. NOyes.
The public record will
show that Mr.. Coyle moved
TO instruct DR.. Whittier to
prepare a list Of budget cuts.
Mr. Saunders seconded the
motion and Mr.. Bell and Mr..
Woodward voted for the mo-
ton. Mrs. Maurer, Mrs. Ke-
ker and Mr.. Beck voted
against It. The action was
taken before the eyes of over
400 citizens and these citi-
Gems heard DR.. Whittier ask
for guidance as TO what areas
10 cut but the new mem
bers refused TO name one
single item, Mrs. Maurer
asked why the amount OF
IS million was picked and
Mr. Coyle stated II rep
resented the increase over
last years budget,
Now II appears that Mr..
Bell and his co-members know
OF many areas where econ
omies could be made. Why
were they reluctant TO make
these areas known 10 Or.
Whittier when he asked for
them2 Surely these gentle
men realized that a student
increase OF almost 5000 as
we'll as their campaign prom
lseS 10 keep the current SAL
airy schedule intact (which
provides for an annual i'm
creased could do nothing less
than show up as an increase
In budget requests over last
year's7
II is quite obvious to any
one who knows anything
about the school budget that