Commentary - Idaho Proposition 1

What Are We Saying to Idaho’s Kids?

By Jill Kuraitis, 10-28-06

It’s awfully hard to be anti-park.

Who could be against setting aside land for people to play in the natural world alongside elk, deer, raccoon, fox, snakes, bald eagles and other assorted critters?

How could anyone object to a black-cottonwood wetland on the Snake River between Firth and Blackfoot as the site for a proposed new state park in eastern Idaho? Or second-guess the obvious hard work of the Idaho Parks and Recreation Board, who narrowed down locations until they settled on this one?

Surely there's nothing wrong with preserving the forest and the wildlife in it as the main objective of the park.

In former Gov. Dirk Kempthorne's "Experience Idaho" parks initiative, proposed in his State of the State address this year, he asked for a total of $33 million to spend on the state park system. The legislature didn't allocate that much, to his disappointment. But they did budget $1 million to begin work on locating and designing a new state park within 60 miles of Idaho Falls.

Parks and Rec has a million to work with, but they chose a property worth $3 million. So either they'll appeal to the 2007 legislature for the difference, or somehow Secretary of the Interior....what's that guy's name again?....Kempthorne will send home the federal pork.

While covering Kempthorne’s State of the State speech for another publication, I have vivid memories of watching heads turn when he threw out that $33 million number. With a $214 million budget surplus to work with, many were hoping most of it would be used to pay for public school facilities, which have more than a $700 million backlog in just basic repairs. Instead, it was earmarked for parks, energy assistance, and what the state calls “the rainy-day fund.”

If hundreds of millions in school repairs that never seem to get taken care of isn’t a rainy day, then what is? Does it have to hail rotten roof joists, crumbling walls, broken boiler parts and splintered toilets? Not a bad idea, now that it's been mentioned. A good bonk on the head might wake up the budget-writers.

But Kempthorne seemed intent on leaving a legacy about parks. Just a few months after his speech, he was appointed Secretary of the Interior by President Bush. (Parks make a person look all outdoorsy-like, don’t they.) And besides, parks are a wonderful thing; something there should be more of; one of the best possible things we can do for the earth, for communities, for the future.

See how it’s hard for people to oppose parks without sounding like nasty old cranks?

But of course, it's not just about parks. It's about priorities. It's about nonessential projects, such as parks, that are taking money away from basic education funding. I don't mean funding for fancy schools (god forbid we should build an attractive school building - why, we'd be telling the kids they're IMPORTANT, and we can't have that) or gold-plated restrooms, or buses with iPod-hookups. I'm talking about roof repairs, toilets that flush, heating that heats, floors without gaping holes, and textbooks that recognize the fall of the Berlin wall. Some school buildings have actually been declared unsafe, yet our children still go to classes in them. Many schools don't have enough textbooks for each child to have one.

So - nasty old crank speaking: I’m against this particular park and Kempthorne's initiative, and other nonessential spending of state funds, until we have a world-class school system in Idaho. That includes all schools repaired to safe, modern standards; every classroom with up-to-date technology and a way to fund upgrades of that technology; class sizes reduced to a reasonable level based on research; equity in funding across districts; teacher pay raised enough to attract high quality candidates to a teaching career (at least they should be paid more than the guy who cleans up tiger poo at the zoo, which right now some are not) special education for both the gifted and the disabled; the very best textbooks and curriculum and a way to fund upgrades of both – I could go on.

But every year, schools get the leftovers of the budget. And each year, the backlog of repairs and other crucial needs for the schools goes unaddressed and grows bigger. It's as if the legislators are clenching their fists and squeezing their eyes shut as hard as possible. A successful lawsuit trying to force them to spend adequate money on the schools, which made it all the way to approval by the Idaho Supreme Court, has also been practically ignored.

For the elected officials who claim to cherish Idaho's children and put a high value on education, this is not adding up. Which candidates have said they're against education? Naturally, not one - yet 70% of the legislature arrived in Boise in January and voted just that way.

Although I don’t think money always buys the best education possible, it’s certainly a huge factor, especially when ceiling tiles are falling on childrens’ heads. Children who are cold, hot, uncomfortable or who don't feel safe can't learn as well as children whose facilities are up to par. Certainly they can't learn from outdated or invisible textbooks.

And what message are we sending kids when we refuse to provide them with schools at least as comfortable as the Statehouse? Could it be they don't feel valued?

Of course, there seems to be plenty of money for a Statehouse overhaul, which is scheduled to start any day now.

The Statehouse needs an overhaul. And we do need more parks. There are plenty of ways to righteously spend $214 million in Idaho. The question is, which do we choose to be first? Which should have the topmost priority?

I can't imagine choosing anything besides children.

My dream would be that schools would have to be fully funded by the legislature before a dime could be spent on anything else. That may be unrealistic, but it’s okay to dream. And perhaps such a policy would finally force legislators to understand how badly they've failed Idaho's kids. They've blown it so profoundly that a state ballot initiative, Proposition 1, will be in front of voters on November 7. It allocates that a penny of the state's 6% sales tax be allocated to schools. It doesn't raise the tax to 7%, as has been reported elsewhere. Each school district can decide how they will spend the money, choosing from any of nine specific purposes written into the proposition.

It's a ticked-off way of trying to force the legislature to live up to their obligations. Parents, grandparents, kids and educators have 700 million reasons to be ticked off.

There is nothing more important than education when it comes to a state’s obligation. Well-educated Idahoans are more likely to build economic prosperity, be better stewards of natural resources, and keep Idaho the Gem State it already is. Educated people are the backbone of a great society, period.

Better-educated people will build more parks.

And decent folks do right by their kids.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.