Yes, how many stories have been penned by journalists or editorializing newspaper representatives who want to make certain teacher's unions recognize their righteous support of public schools?
That's why it seems disingenuous when the same paper issues favorable reports on TIF revenue being used on pet city projects.
In a special report about the incentives included in the city's deal with McGowan Walsh on the Heers agreement, the News-Leader reports that the developer can request Heers be designated as part of a tax-increment financing (TIF) district and, apparently, it raises no cockles:
"- A tax-increment financing district. Property tax revenue collected on new development in a TIF district can be used to pay for projects that will benefit the public. Without a TIF, that additional revenue would go to the city, county, Springfield school district and city-county library system." (emphasis mine)
The duplicity leaves one questioning whether it's okay for funds to be pilfered from the Springfield school district to offset costs incurred by the developer in the restoration and remodeling of the Heers building (since I'm not aware of the News-Leader taking issue with TIF in the past) but please, it's out of the question to pilfer revenue from the Springfield school district if it means the revenue will be used for the actual purpose of educating children (part of its original intended use).
I guess it depends on who supports the pilfering. If the politicians in the City of Springfield wish to use revenue which would otherwise go to the Springfield school district for the purpose of revitalizing the downtown district, for restoration of the "crown jewel of Springfield," Springfield Public Schools be damned. If the purpose is for tax paying citizens interested in school choice who would like a voucher system put in place to offset the cost of educating children via other options, well, that, apparently isn't good use of the ciphoned revenue....
And why wouldn't the teacher's unions be as up in arms about TIF districts "abandoning" the public schools as they are about those nasty parents who would prefer to educate their children in another manner? Why the difference? Why no outcry when funds are siphoned from public schools and libraries for redevelopment and revitalization of TIF districts all across the state but such railing and rallying of newspaper editorialists when that siphoning includes a bit of competition being thrown the way of the teacher's unions?
Is it really the revenue loss that teacher's unions and their supporters are upset about or is it competition that has them up in arms?