Comments on: Private Sector Fills Education Gap

By: Scott Borah

Scott Borah — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:05:19 +0000

I just wandered onto this site by chance. I am related to Senator William E. Borah and just got back from meting with Senator Craig in Washington, D.C. I have been inquiring about a position where a community college would meet the needs of not only for those individuals who have specific careers requiring less than a four year degree, but for those who may want to transfer their credits to an university to eventually complete their bachelors and beyond ( sometimes the employer they work for because of their associate’s degree will pay for their advanced education.

I Career Counselor, Academic Career Internship Director at the high school level in Indiana. It is amazing what a community college can do for a student who realizes that only 20% of jobs require a bachelor’s degree ( the same as the 1950s ) Our local Indiana Purdue Fort Wayne University (IPFW) has benefited from the Ivy Tech Community College existance and vice versa. More importantly the skill level and employability of those young people who would have just had a high school diploma or never complete their bachelors increased significally. Now talking about taxes as an outsider ( and I am a fiscal conservative republican )would be inappropriate. However, the tax revenue generated by those employed with an associate’s degree and the contributions they will make as they become lifetime learners and earners must be taken into account. Sincerely, Scott Borah

By: Amazed

Amazed — Thu, 10 May 2007 03:23:50 +0000

You people are ridiculous. Boise is the only city of its size without a community college. If you want to have an educated, trained workforce, you have to pay for it through your taxes. Sure, this is not the best proposal but that’s because our legislature abrogated its responsibility to fund a community college. Thousands of students who are completely unqualified for college are admitted to Boise State since it is still charged with fulfilling a community college function. They then fail and this contributes to BSU’s high dropout rate. Students need a more affordable place to get the remedial classes that will allow them to eventually get the higher education they need. If there is a community college, they will get the help they need and this will allow Boise State to have the higher admissions standards necessary to become a university rather than a community college.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 09 May 2007 01:57:17 +0000

I too read the 14 questions in the Statesman and after some quick math here is the deal. Canyon County folks pay about $2,000.00 per $100,000.00 of taxable value as property taxes. State law limits the amount a community college taxing district can charge to an additional $125 per $100K of taxable value. If this measure passes you need to be prepared to pay the $125 per $100K. This will mean a 6.25% increase on the property taxes you already pay. We are getting the low-ball buyin on this deal and will get served up the full deal once this project gets rolling. CSI with all the brick and mortar paid for costs their local taxpayers $91/$100k of taxable value.

TVCC currently serves about 1700 students in their Caldwell facilities at no taxpayer costs. All of the courses are funded by the people taking the courses. They are looking to expand offerings and expanding facilities to the Sky Ranch Business Park in Caldwell. TVCC is on the quarter system and an analysis of the costs put it on the same costing basis as the proposed community college deal that we are getting blitzed with.

The cost of $120/unit computes to $1800/semester or $3600/academic year. TVCC is $1300/per quarter with three quarters per acacemic year. Slightly more. but at no cost to the taxpayers.

By: joe Moran

joe Moran — Wed, 02 May 2007 22:01:52 +0000

I’m all for increased education but Tim Rhodes makes some indisputable arguments all backed up by facts.

I read the article in today’s Statesman(5-2-07) on ” questions about a new community college” and really got a laugh.The statesman asks in #4-” What will a new community College cost the taxpayers?

Would you,or any sane person believe their answer is ” No one knows!” I have never read such journalistic hype and insanity in my life! VOTE NO on a new community college and save yourself a pocket full of cash, Mr. taxpayer ( you’ll also be making a local developer get an honest job!)

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:55:10 +0000

As you read or listen to the many promotions for a community college in the valley, have you noticed that they are leaving many important questions unanswered?

First off, voters have no say as to who will serve on the College Board. They will be appointed by another appointed board, the State Board of Education.

This appointed board will establish a budget for the new school. Until that budget is set the property tax payers have no idea how much their property taxes will increase.

We don’t know, for sure, what courses will be offered or how much tuition will be charged.

Also, how many students will be siphoned off from the thirty or more private schools already operating in our community? This is another example of bigger government competing with private enterprise.

Finally, just think of the fun students from Boise will have trying to maneuver the freeway to get to a school in Nampa during busy hours.

I am suggesting we all vote “No” on May 22nd.

By: John Lodman

John Lodman — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 20:38:27 +0000

The property tax rate authorized by HB 181 is 0.125%. This translates to $125 per $100,000 in assessed value. Of course, this is the maximum rate authorized. The trustees might choose to tax at a lower rate depending on the needs of the school. The trustees, at least the first set, will be appointed by the Board of Education.

I would also point out that in addition to the schools posted in previous comments, Lewis-Clark (Lewiston), and CSI (Twin Falls) both have extensive vocational-technical course offerings.

Finally, why is BSU so anxious to shed its community college roots? Why not continue to operate the Selland College under BSU? Instead, we’re going to end up with an entirely new bureaucracy. In additon, we’ll have an independent taxing district that answers to no one.

I am pro-education right down the line, but this plan makes no sense on many levels. Vote No.

By: James

James — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 01:26:00 +0000

Anyone who thinks the typical profit-motivated private technical school mentioned in this article is a better choice than a community college is frighteningly uninformed.

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:58:34 +0000

I vote NO also. Haven’t we seen enough waste of our tax dollars going for education.

Someone should post the cost of just the admistration salaries. Overpaid, big retirement benefits, more medical than the private sector has. Sorry I’m sick of it all.

By: Sisyphus

Sisyphus — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:32:32 +0000

“Several private colleges have entered the area providing quality education and training: Stevens-Henagar College, Apollo College, University of Phoenix, George Fox University, and ITT Technical just to name a few.”

Surely you jest.

By: Steve Ackerman

Steve Ackerman — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:02:28 +0000

I agree wholeheartedly with Tim Rhodes. He is telling Canyon County that they need to step back and consider the market that is already established (and growing) to address our education needs, instead of running headlong into an open-ended solution that could significantly burden taxpayers.

Whether it is light rail, education, healthcare, and so on, we need to leverage the flexibility, creativity, and entrepreneurship of the private sector to resolve problems that are larger than a single county.

It is not clear why Canyon, Ada, or any county should undermine the response we’re already seeing in distance learning, private schools, etc. merely to satisfy an immediate parochial desire. The workers of Canyon county need solutions, not additional tax burdens.

As a resident of Kuna, I advise Ada county to take heed. I urge Canyon county voters to vote NO.