Don't get me started on school bond issues. It seems like they always seem to pass - regardless of the purposes. Do we actually need new synthetic turf practice fields for the high schools? Why do we have TWO football stadiums when the high schools are less than 3 miles from each other?With the pause, they found that some universities are using up to 70% of federal grant money for overhead.
View attachment 49596
But its federal money. Nobody is ever going to look into how we are spending this, right?
The public funding debates inevitably follows these lines:
The cutter cites the waste.
Advocates cite the good intentions or the actual good things achieved.
Now, the above is federal R&D moneys, but spending 70% of a federal grant on overhead leave the school and the program open to charges that they are not good stewards of the taxpayers' money and relying on inattention to public spending.
In Virginia, a school board asked for more in tax revenue for "education," and some journalists found out it was so the school board could buy new office furniture and computers to replace the furniture and computers that were five years old. The school board quietly withdrew the request, which had nothing to do with "education" in the first place.
I don't think the vast majority of people even read the bond issues for schools. They just vote "yes" because they think it's good for education.
We pay the highest property taxes in the state of Iowa. Yet we are dinged for textbooks to the tune of $150 a kid.