LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND TAXATION 111 



tration, state-wide supervision, and high school tuition obviously 

 would remain unchanged. A summary of the finances of each district 

 under such a plan had it been in effect during 1940-41 follows : 



Obviously, from a purely fiscal point of view, it is more economical 

 for District B to maintain its two one-room schools than to transport 

 the pupils elsewhere and to pay tuition. 



The amount of taxable wealth per capita for Districts A and B is 

 $1,340 and $951, respectively. Thus, District A has an apparent ad- 

 vantage over District B in providing public services of an identical 

 quality at lower cost per unit of assessed valuation. However, the 

 school tax rate is much higher in District A than in District B because 

 the average family income is higher and the voters are therefore less 

 hesitant to appropriate money for educational purposes, and because 

 appropriations are spread over a relatively large amount of taxable 

 wealth. A modern eight-room school building cannot be owned bv 

 District B except at prohibitive costs of construction, operation, and 

 maintenance, in view of the relatively low valuation. If District A 

 were not to provide high school transportation, and if there were no 

 interest and principal payments on bonded indebtedness, its school 

 tax would have been $1.34 per $100 of assessed valuation in 1940-1941, 

 still much higher than the District B rate of $1.12. 



Assuming that the two districts were to organize a union district, 

 use only the newly constructed A school, and spread all costs, except 

 high school transportation, uniformly over all the taxable wealth of 

 the two districts. A summary of the union's finances for 1940-1941 

 A\'ould appear about as follows : 



Union District 



Expenditures $35,200 



Income 1,200 



Balance to property tax $34,000 



Assessed valuation $2,434,710 



School tax rate $1.40 



These figures are based on the assumption that the expense for debt 

 service would be spread proportionately over the assessed valuation 

 of the two districts. Surely there is justification in assuming that 

 District B must undergo an annual capital investment in the new 

 plant, although it is conceivable that factors other than taxable 

 wealth, particularly the number of pupils, would play an important 

 part in bringing about an agreement between the two districts. If the 



