? 
T 
American Agriculturist 
THE FARM PAPER THAT PRINTS THE FARM NEWS 
“Agriculture is the Most Healthful, Most Useful and Most Noble Employment of Man ”—Washington ' 
Reg. U. S, Pat. Off. Established 1842 
Volume 112 For the Week Ending September 29, 1923 Number 13 
The School Bill and The Farmers’ Taxes 
Equalization and More State Aid Would Reduce Burden in Many Districts ■ 
I N our last issue we promised an explana¬ 
tion of the effect upon farmers’ school 
taxes if the School Bill, which was before 
the New York State Legislature last 
winter, should pass. 
In these times when the farmers are taxed 
for everything almost beyond their capacity 
to bear, they have a right to know what effect 
any new proposal will have on their present 
tax burden. We believe that farmers are 
more willing to pay school taxes than other 
forms of taxes, knowing that the welfare 
of their own children and the future of 
America itself depend upon good schools. 
But at the same time, willingness to pay the 
school taxes must rest upon being sure that 
value is received in better schools for every 
dollar of tax paid. In too many instances 
now under the present law a 
farmer does not get full value _ 
for his school taxes, and there 
is much dissatisfaction, which is 
fully justified, about school taxes 
in hundreds of farm communities 
in New York State. 
H 
cannot be helped because there are many 
schools with few pupils that could not con¬ 
solidate on account of bad roads or weather, 
or some other cause. The second cause for 
differences in cost of maintaining the same 
kind of schools is the difference in efficiency 
in handling their business affairs. 
While many rural school districts make 
the keeping down of the tax-rate the chief 
object of their administration, the measures 
taken to make an economical expenditure of 
the money spent are faulty. This is proved 
by the replies made to certain questions by 
128 district superintendents and 944 school 
directors scattered throughout the entire 
State. Budgets are not prepared in 50 per 
cent of the districts and in only one-half of 
these cases is the advice of the district super¬ 
Reserve Judgment 
ERE is another of the explanatory articles on the proposed 
Costs Differ for Same Kind of Schools 
One of the causes of dissatis¬ 
faction and criticism from a tax 
point is the great differences 
in cost of maintaining district 
schools in different parts of the 
same county and in different 
parts of the State. For instance, 
for the year 1920> there was one f —— — 
school in Delaware County that 
cost somewhere between $675 and $699 to 
run; while in another common school dis¬ 
trict having no more advantages than the 
first, the cost was between $1,425 and $1,449, 
or more than twice as much. In Tompkins 
County, for the same year, the cost in one 
school district was between $600 and $624; 
while in the same county another school, no 
better than the first, cost from $1,100 to 
$1,124. In Monroe County, the cheapest 
school was maintained at a cost of from $775 
to $779; while there were three other dis¬ 
trict schools which cost over $1,500 each. 
Throughout the entire State, neighboring 
districts differ greatly in the cost of main¬ 
taining practically the same school facilities. 
Even when no account is taken of the cost 
of repairs, it is frequently found that one 
school will cost from one and a half to two 
times as much as the school in the adjoin¬ 
ing district. 
Getting at it from another angle, and 
putting the differences of cost on a pupil 
basis, i. e., comparing the cost of one year’s 
schooling for one pupil, it was found in Dela¬ 
ware County that it cost eleven times as 
much in one district per pupil as it did in a 
neighboring district. In another section of 
Delaware County, it cost thirty-three times 
as much to educate one pupil for one year in 
one of the schools as a pupil cost in another 
nearby school. 
There are two chief reasons for these 
great variations. The first is the difference 
in the number of pupils. In many cases this 
School Bill. If you are interested in the school problem from 
a tax standpoint, the facts here set forth may contain a surprise 
for you. After you read this, save it and give it to a neighbor, or 
better still, have it read out loud at your Grange or other farm 
meeting. 
More of these explanations will follow. We hope that you will 
reserve judgment either for or against the bill until you have had 
time and opportunity to study all the facts.—The Editors. 
tions are about one-twelfth that of the 
wealthiest district in the county. In Erie 
County, there is one district which has a 
valuation over sixty times as much as any 
other district. In Clinton County, the high¬ 
est valuation of one district is over seventy 
times that of the lowest. Putting it in other 
words, in these districts mentioned, it is from 
thirty-four to seventy times easier to main¬ 
tain the same school facilities in some dis¬ 
tricts as in others. These examples may be 
rather extreme, but every farmer can think 
of cases nearly as bad in his own county. 
To overcome these inequalities in taxes, 
and to give rural school patrons an oppor¬ 
tunity to improve their schools, without add¬ 
ing greatly to their tax burden, the Rural 
School Bill contains two important school tax 
provisions. It provides first, for 
■ i more equalization of the tax rate 
and second, for much more finan¬ 
cial help for the rural schools 
from the, State. Of this help 
from the State for Rural schools 
the cities will pay 87 per cent. 
intendent obtained. Supplies are purchased 
as needed from local stores in 90 per cent 
of the districts, and at regular retail prices 
in practically all districts, instead of pur¬ 
chases being made at one time and in quanti¬ 
ties which would secure wholesale prices. As 
a result, supplies cost 20 per cent more than 
they should. Again, taxes are not collected 
promptly in three-fourths of the districts, 
and the moneys so received are, in but few 
cases, placed on deposit in banks at interest 
—thus losing two or more per cent on the 
amounts in deposit. 
How Tax Rates Vary 
Now let us see how the farmer’s tax rates 
vary in different districts, for after all, that is 
what he is particularly interested in. In 
order to compare the tax rates in different 
districts, it is necessary first to get the 
equalized valuations of the property, for all 
of us know assessors may assess property 
50 per cent of its true value in one district 
and 75 per cent of its true value in another. 
It is possible, however, to get the true valua¬ 
tions in the different districts through the 
records of the State Tax Commis*sion and the 
following statements are based on the true 
valuations so that they are fair comparisons. 
In Delaware County, there is one district 
that has an equalized valuation per teacher 
approximately thirty-four times as great as 
four other districts that have the same edu¬ 
cational advantages. In Tompkins County, 
there are three districts whose true valua¬ 
Would Equalize the Taxes 
As we explained in last week’s 
issue, the bill contains a provision 
for establishing a community unit 
for administration of the schools 
and for taxation purposes. The 
common school districts which 
would make up the community 
school district will be left as they 
are, unless the people in these dis¬ 
tricts, should themselves vote to unite with 
some other school or schools—understand 
that, “unless the people in these districts 
should themselves vote to unite.” But the 
bill provides that the larger community dis¬ 
trict would be the unit of taxation instead 
of the common school district and the local 
tax rate would be worked out on the larger 
community unit instead of on the property 
in the smaller school district as at present. 
This plan would then equalize the taxes in 
all of the districts in the community unit 
and there would no longer be adjoining dis¬ 
tricts which would have such absurd differ¬ 
ences in tax rates for the same kind of 
schools as now exist. 
More Help From the State 
This equalization also is absolutely fair 
and right because it would cause the larger, 
wealthier districts to divide or share their 
taxable property with the poorer districts 
back on the hills. At the same time, it 
would not greatly increase, if it would at 
all, the taxes of the residents of the 
wealthier districts, because all of the dis¬ 
tricts, both rich and poor, would get more 
help to support their schools from the 
State. 
The second tax provision in the proposed 
bill, is that of more State aid for the sup¬ 
port of rural schools. If the bill should 
pass, something over ten million dollars more 
State aid would go for the support of the 
(Continued, on page 214) 
