Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

NDIX TABLE A.-Summary by counties of AD.A. reported by 444 applicants der Public Law 874 in col. 6 of table 3, p. 3, of the final report form RSF-3 957-58)

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small]

addition a total of 730 average daily attendance was reported by 2 applicants, Valle Lindo, of Los es, County, and De Luz, of San Diego County, under sec. 2 of the act.

45135-5915

APPENDIX TABLE B.-California school districts which received in excess of $100,000 from Public Law 874 in 1957-58

[blocks in formation]

APPENDIX TABLE C.-Comparison of assistance under Public Law 874 and total current expense in selected California school districts, 1957–58

[blocks in formation]

Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

MY DEAR MR. BARDEN: I am taking the liberty of bringing to your attention he enclosed letter received from the principal of the North Chicago Community High School, setting forth in detail the reasons why he is opposed to any change or cutback in Public Laws 874 and 815.

With best wishes, I am,

Sincerely yours,

MARGUERITE STITT CHURCH.

on. MARGUERITE STITT CHURCH, ouse of Representatives,

"ashington, D.C.

NORTH CHICAGO COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL,
North Chicago, Ill., June 8, 1959.

DEAR MRS. CHURCH: I have just received word that a change and cutback are ntemplated in Public Laws 874 and 815. I think any change that would cut nds from schools in federally impacted areas would be most unfair. It is ficult to explain to you fully the expense over and above the normal expense at is involved in handling dependents of military personnel. With this in nd, I hope you will study this problem thoroughly. I would, of course, be Iling to do all I can to inform any committee completely on this problem.

I would like to mention quickly some of the problems that come to my mind that should influence any decision in the revision of these laws.

1. In dealing with dependents of military personnel, there exists a large turnover which necessitates the sending, receiving, interpreting, and evaluating many transcripts.

2. There is an imposition on teachers' time to test, tutor, and prepare students transferring overseas for early exams from about the middle of April to the end of the year. These students may not arrive at the next duty station in time to complete their work, so we have them finish up earlier. These demands on teacher time are over and above that of teachers teaching in districts where there are no military dependents.

3. Many attendance problems are caused.

4. We have a tremendous amount of correspondence with students coming in and those who have left this school.

5. There is the problem of the type of situations which develop close to military agencies which affect discipline in the high school.

(a) Slum or near-slum areas develop.

(b) Civil service employment attracts some undesirable people.

(c) Boot camp turning out boys on their first leave have some effect on boys and girls of the community.

6. We forget the large loss to districts in this area when Federal property comes off tax rolls. We would stand to benefit greatly if the assessed valuation of the Federal institutions would be placed on taxrolls and then tuition was waived.

With all of the talk that is going on about Federal aid to education, it seems to me that the programs which have withstood the tests of time should be continued. If they are going to take something out of one pocket and put it in another, then let's examine it thoroughly.

Thank you for all of your interest in our problems to date.
Sincerely,

LESTER J. HARMAN, Principal.

[blocks in formation]

Hon. CLEVELAND M. BAILEY, Chairman, Education Subcommittee, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN BAILEY: Enclosed is a copy of a letter I have received from Mr. E. Allen Bateman, State superintendent of public instruction in Utah, which indicates the very serious effect the proposed changes in Public Laws 874 and $15 would have on the amount of Federal funds now being made available to qualified school districts in the State of Utah.

I will appreciate it if this letter can be made a part of the record of the hearings and called to the attention of the members of your subcommittee. I strongly oppose the recommendations made by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in this respect.

With kindest regards,

Sincerely,

Hon. FRANK E. Moss,

FRANK E. Moss, U.S. Senator.

THE STATE OF UTAH,

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
Salt Lake City, July 27, 1959.

U.S. Senator,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MOSS: I understand that the House Education Subcommittee will resume hearings on the Health, Education, and Welfare Secretary's proposals for changes in Public Laws 874 and 815 on Tuesday, July 28.

The proposed new legislation under H.R. 7140, if enacted, would reduce the amount of Federal funds now being made available to qualified school districts of the State of Utah. In Utah there are 40 school districts, of which 10 received Federal funds under Public Law 874 for the 1958-59 school year.

If the proposed amendments had been in effect during the 1958-59 school year for revenues under Public Law 874, there would have been an estimated loss of

$380,000 to the 10 school districts. The school districts involved and their estimated losses are as follows:

[blocks in formation]

The above figures are based on estimated data for the 1958-59 school year and will vary somewhat from the actual data when finally tabulated after August 15. On Public Law 815, it is estimated that Davis School District will be the district mostly affected in Utah. They estimated a loss of $68,600 if the proposed

amendments are made in Public Law 815.

I wish to point out that the statement of Secretary Flemming before the House Education and Labor Committee on Tuesday, June 9, 1959, a copy of which was received in our office from the U.S. Office of Education, is in error with respect to data applying to the State of Utah. Secretary Flemming made the statement that the existing laws were based on the idea that approximately 50 percent of the assessed value of property upon which local school taxes are levied would come from commercial or industrial property and approximately 50 percent from residential property. He presented data from the report on property tax assessments published in December 1957 by the Bureau of the Census indicating that for the country as a whole commercial and industrial property accounts were only 27.7 percent of the locally assessed real estate base.

Although this statement may technically be true as given, it is applied in the wrong way to give the idea that the assessed value of property on which school taxes are based has only about one-fourth to one-third commercial and industrial assessment. In the State of Utah, much of our commercial and industrial property is assessed by the State Tax Commission and is not locally assessed. However, this property becomes a part of the assessed valuation against which the local school district tax rate is levied. In our State the commercial and industrial property is fully 50 percent of the total assessed valuation upon which the local school tax is levied. I believe you have received information from our State Tax Commission on this matter.

We need your assistance in maintaining present legislation under Public Law 874 and 815. A statement from you in behalf of the school districts in Utah which are now receiving Federal aid would be most helpful.

Sincerely yours,

E. ALLEN BATEMAN, State Superintendent of Public Instruction.

BEAVERCREEK PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
Xenia, Ohio, August 3, 1959.

Hon. CLEVELAND M. BAILEY,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. BAILEY: We have appreciated the help we have had from your committee in the past for federally affected school districts. We understand hat a subcommittee is at present holding hearings on a proposal to reduce the Federal support factor to those districts with Federal employees working on ut living off Federal installations.

Speaking for the school districts in the Third, Fourth, and Seventh Congresional Districts in Ohio, we find the shifting of personnel in and out of WrightPatterson Air Force Base makes it necessary for us to have some other resource han local and State taxes to meet the sudden enrollment situations that occur requently.

We have only a small part of the base in our district but 1,200 of our students 26.2 percent) are children of WPAFB employees. The increase this past year -as over 100 students.

Since we are primarily a residential district with less than 1 million indusial tax duplicate, we are very sensitive to changes in Federal support under ublic Law 815 and Public Law 874.

We trust that when you vote on this in subcommittee, whole committee, or the floor, you will support the existing program.

Sincerely,

VAUGHN LEWIS,

Superintendent, Beavercreek Schools.

« ForrigeFortsett »