Most private schools don't provide for transportation of ANY students and ALL students have to find a way to school. Is it by rule or by choice that transportation is not provided?

 

My question is would the Ashland people have gotten their bloomers all in a bunch like they did if Mayo had provided his own transportation to school? According to you there would have been nothing different then. Somehow I suspect that there would have still been wailing and gnashing of teeth.

 

 

I don't know if it's a rule or choice. But I doubt the taxpayers of Ashland would agree with the school system sending busses they pay for, out of district to pick up students.

 

As far as your other question, the situation never bothered me much to begin with, so you may want to ask someone else. But I would say the transportation issue had a lot to do with it, it was the primary topic between posters on this site.

Of course, the other side of that is that I, as one who pays school tax to the Ashland schools, am paying for the education of out of district Ashland students whose parents are paying nothing to have their children in the Ashland system.

 

 

Don't you pay Boyd County school taxes too, since you live in Boyd County? It works both ways.

You obviously miss the point. Let me give you a hypothetical that actually is not really hypothetical at all but, instead, a fact.

 

Let's say that a family living in the Boyd County District sends a couple of its sons to Ashland to play sports. Reciprocity allows that and the state funds for those two athletes follow them from Boyd County to Ashland.

 

I, as a property owner in Ashland, pay school taxes to the Ashland Independent School System. So do the other citizens who own property in Ashland. That money goes to educate students who reside in Ashland. That money also goes to educate the two athletes from Boyd County.

 

The parents of the two athletes from Boyd County pay nothing to Ashland for the education of their two sons. Of course, if they own property out in the county, they do pay taxes to the Boyd County schools.

 

The fact that they may well pay taxes to the Boyd County schools is of no consolation to me. The bottom line is that I, and all who pay taxes to the Ashland schools, are subsidizing the two athletes and their parents are contributing nothing.

 

That, my friend, is the issue and the inequity. Who did or didn't and who does or doesn't run vans and/or buses should be of no importance to you since it isn't costing you anything. If you have no pecuniary interest, you have no bullets in your gun.

You obviously miss the point. Let me give you a hypothetical that actually is not really hypothetical at all but, instead, a fact.

 

Let's say that a family living in the Boyd County District sends a couple of its sons to Ashland to play sports. Reciprocity allows that and the state funds for those two athletes follow them from Boyd County to Ashland.

 

I, as a property owner in Ashland, pay school taxes to the Ashland Independent School System. So do the other citizens who own property in Ashland. That money goes to educate students who reside in Ashland. That money also goes to educate the two athletes from Boyd County.

 

The parents of the two athletes from Boyd County pay nothing to Ashland for the education of their two sons. Of course, if they own property out in the county, they do pay taxes to the Boyd County schools.

 

The fact that they may well pay taxes to the Boyd County schools is of no consolation to me. The bottom line is that I, and all who pay taxes to the Ashland schools, are subsidizing the two athletes and their parents are contributing nothing.

 

That, my friend, is the issue and the inequity. Who did or didn't and who does or doesn't run vans and/or buses should be of no importance to you since it isn't costing you anything. If you have no pecuniary interest, you have no bullets in your gun.

 

 

I understand what your saying about the Boyd County people getting the better end of the deal. But that seems to just be a downfall of living in the city, you pay more taxes, period. Does that make it right, not exactly.

 

What I am saying is whether anyone transfered to Ashland from the county or not, the people living in the city are still going to get the raw end of the deal, as they always have. Since Ashland is in Boyd County, you pay taxes for both school systems, correct? So essentially, no matter how you slice it, or how many times you slice it, your supporting two school systems by living in the city of Ashland. Forgive me if I am wrong, but that's the way I understood it when I lived in the city.

Who did or didn't and who does or doesn't run vans and/or buses should be of no importance to you since it isn't costing you anything. If you have no pecuniary interest, you have no bullets in your gun.

 

 

Your directing that at the wrong person, because as I said before, it's not an issue to me.

My thought after reading the article is: what in the world is Boyd and Greenup thinking? Why would you continue to agree to such a lopsided deal?

My thought after reading the article is: what in the world is Boyd and Greenup thinking? Why would you continue to agree to such a lopsided deal?

 

Both of those systems have been used and abused for years. One would think that, sooner or later, they would catch on. Alas, they have not done so. But, then, competence has not been a trademark of either system and neither system has ever excelled in anything but controversy.

I understand what your saying about the Boyd County people getting the better end of the deal. But that seems to just be a downfall of living in the city, you pay more taxes, period. Does that make it right, not exactly.

 

What I am saying is whether anyone transfered to Ashland from the county or not, the people living in the city are still going to get the raw end of the deal, as they always have. Since Ashland is in Boyd County, you pay taxes for both school systems, correct? So essentially, no matter how you slice it, or how many times you slice it, your supporting two school systems by living in the city of Ashland. Forgive me if I am wrong, but that's the way I understood it when I lived in the city.

 

We in Ashland pay city taxes, county taxes, and Ashland school taxes. We do not pay Boyd County school taxes. Those in the county pay county taxes and Boyd County school taxes.

 

Ashlanders do pay a double tax of sorts. However, it is for operation of the county and the county government and not for county schools.

 

I'm pleased that you are not opposed to vans and buses. You are more enlightened than are most with strong maroon ties.

EDIT: Quoted the wrong post.

Ashlanders do pay a double tax of sorts. However, it is for operation of the county and the county government and not for county schools.

 

 

I figured the county taxes covered the county school system, I guess that's not true. I never have understood exactly how our tax system works.

I don't know if it's a rule or choice. But I doubt the taxpayers of Ashland would agree with the school system sending busses they pay for, out of district to pick up students.

 

As far as your other question, the situation never bothered me much to begin with, so you may want to ask someone else. But I would say the transportation issue had a lot to do with it, it was the primary topic between posters on this site.

But you have no problem with tax payers outside of Ashland subsidizing outside of their district.

 

Interesting

Interesting article in the Ashland paper today. Further evidence that all public schools are not bound by their district boundries.

 

http://www.dailyindependent.com/local/local_story_021005056.html

Now why is it that some of the public schools mentioned in the article are complaining that private schools dont have a true district .:confused:

But you have no problem with tax payers outside of Ashland subsidizing outside of their district.

 

Interesting

 

 

Where did I say that? To this point I don't think I have taken a stance on the issue at all. All I did was answer the question you asked. As far as Im concerend if the local county schools don't want their students, they can send them wherever they want. The independent districts that seem to be getting them are not going out of their way to attract these students, and they are not going out of their way to get them to school, they are simply accepting students that don't want to go to the county schools. It seems the county schools don't have a problem with it and they are the only people who should, IMO.

Now why is it that some of the public schools mentioned in the article are complaining that private schools dont have a true district .:confused:

 

 

 

Here we go.. :sleep:

I figured the county taxes covered the county school system, I guess that's not true. I never have understood exactly how our tax system works.

 

The answer to how the taxing system works is "poorly".