The article outlining the dilemma facing Pelham’s elementary school (“Pelham elementary school faces budget deficit, possible closure,” Gazette, Jan. 26) noted the pressure of rising health care costs, inflation, and declining enrollment. What the article failed to mention is the recommendation in 2022 that rural aid be funded with $60 million to counter the shortfalls experienced by the 91 rural towns (in 138 districts with 38,000 students) across the state. Yet, this year, the state cut rural school aid by 25%, bringing it down to $12 million.
The result of the funding gap has resulted in rural districts levying higher taxes, neglecting all areas of town budgets, cutting education staff, programs and services. As a result, parents are sending children to charter schools (paid for by local taxes) further fueling a death spiral for rural schools.
Raising property taxes increases the cost of housing in a market already besieged by high prices. Property tax is regressive — it does not take into consideration if you lost your job, food, utilities, health insurance premiums that have shot up, or if someone is injured and can’t work. Shifting rising educations costs to local taxes is not sustaining our rural towns. There has to be a balance of state and local taxes to fund services across the state equitably.
State income tax is the source of revenue that spreads the taxes more evenly to support the state, and therefore, local budgets. Last Friday the governor recommended $20 million for rural aid, a third of what is needed for the 38,000 rural school students. There is money in Fair Share and there is money in the operating budget to reach the annual funding of $60 million advocated for in 2022.
Please visit Ruralschoolsma.org. Use the “take action” button. Stand up for a fair share for our rural schools and to sustain our small towns.
Susie Mosher
Shutesbury