H.S. levy is reasonable request

There has been an interesting refrain from a few people in recent weeks as the Kalispell school district seeks tax-levy approval on Tuesday.

It goes something like this: We already are shelling out millions of dollars for a new high school - why should we tax ourselves more to run the school?

If only the world were that simple: Pay once and be done with it.

That overlooks the simple fact that once you build a school, you have to equip it, staff it and maintain it. That costs money.

When you buy a house, does that mean you put no more money into it beyond the mortgage? Hardly.

The same goes for schools.

The $34 million that voters generously approved to build Glacier High School was money just for bricks and mortar, not staffers and programs.

The biggest reason for Kalispell's request for an extra $637,547 in high school money is the need to duplicate activities and programs at Glacier High School that currently exist at Flathead High. But even so, the levy request is only 4 percent of the proposed $15.6 million high school budget for next year.

And the levy request shouldn't be a surprise. When voters were asked in 2004 to approve bonds to build a new high school, they were told by school officials that extra levy requests would be likely to run a second high school.

While the amount of extra taxes requested this year might be higher than in past years, the levy request is not unprecedented. Many years the school district has sought extra levies when there was only one high school in town.

The Flathead/Glacier money isn't the only big-ticket request by valley schools, either. Whitefish is asking for almost $400,000, Columbia Falls wants $241,395, West Valley is seeking $98,000 and even Kila has requested an extra $147,500 from taxpayers.

All told, Flathead Valley schools are asking voters for $1.8 million in Tuesday's election.

Uncertainty about state funding is a factor in most of the money requests, along with meeting a variety of building or classroom needs.

More money doesn't automatically guarantee a better education, of course, but we think our local schools deserve support for their levy requests.

Although the overall dollar figures may seem daunting, when broken down on an individual level they're not so overwhelming. For example, Kalispell's high school levy would cost the owner of a $200,000 house an extra $40 a year.

How many people pay that much money a month for lattes or cell-phone roaming charges or downloading music? That $40 is an investment in something a little more important - the future of our children.

Kalispell's high school request, in particular, is crucial. Don't we all want the students in our brand-new school to have every advantage possible? A "yes" vote on Tuesday might make that possible.