Public Lands in Utah, Yes or No?

According to the Constitution of The State of Utah, Article III, Section 2:

“[Right to public domain disclaimed. Taxation of lands. Exemptions.] Second:--The people inhabiting this State do affirm and declare that they will forever disclaim all right and title to the unapropriated (sic) public lands lying within the boundaries hereof, and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes. And that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States. . .”

This Constitution was ratified in 1896, and Utah became a state. The Constitution of The State of Utah is the law of our land. Utah disclaimed all right and title to the unapropriated (sic) public lands.

So why, you might ask, did the (Utah) Commission for the Stewardship of Public Lands pay $640,000 to Davillier Law Firm of New Orleans to analyze the legality of suing the Federal Government to allow Utah to take over all the public lands? (Salt Lake Tribune, February 2, 2016) And why won’t the legal team give the complete report to all members of the Commission, which consists of five republicans and two democrats? (Part of this report has been made available to the member of the commission and the public, it only outlines the “positive” effects of this proposed lawsuit.) Neither of the Democrats (Senators Debakis and Briscoe) have been allowed to review the entire report. Why not? What is the legal team afraid of? A conflict of interest on behalf of the law firm, or the chairman, perhaps? Or, more telling, that the State of Utah would lose this battle in court?

The head of the Davillier legal team has said Davillier is protected by client-attorney privilege and can only release the information to the chairman of the Commission, David P. Hinkins, or to others upon approval of Chairman Hinkins. What is the chairman afraid of?

Hold on just a taxpayer-fleecing minute. The entire commission voted to hire the legal team, not just the chairman. The entire commission should be entitled to the complete report, as should the voters of Utah! To withhold this information is to deny the commission, and the voters of Utah, the information they need to make an informed decision. We, the taxpayers, of Utah, paid for this report, and I for one want to read it, in its entirety, without redactions.

I also want to know who is going to benefit from the takeover of public lands in Utah. Will it be land developers, the extraction industries, the cattlemen, or the hospitality industry? What about hunting, hiking, camping, fishing, and off road enthusiasts, or antiquities thieves?

Is this just one more ploy of the American Lands Council, headed by Utah state representative Ken Ivory, to fleece the Utah taxpayers; to deny our children and grandchildren the right to enjoy all the outdoor vistas and experiences that Utah offers?

I fear it is. Please feel free to post your comments or thoughts.

Thank you, Senator Debakis and Robert Gehkre of the Tribune, for making this issue public.

Retrieved February 2, 2016, from : http://www.archives.state.ut.us/research/exhibits/Statehood/1896text.htm

An open letter to Utah State Senator Jim Debakis

Senator Debakis,

I read with pleasure, and in the main agree with, your op-ed in the July 5^th SL Tribune. Education in Utah is in terrible shape, and the largest single contributor to the condition is the lack of funding. I’d like to discuss your article and share my thoughts with you.

As you pointed out, teacher salaries in Utah are an embarrassment to any thinking individual. Utah colleges and universities turn out very well qualified teachers, but they cannot afford to stay in Utah and teach. We are losing this valuable resource to 49 other states. Our teachers should be paid, at the least, the average salary for teachers in the United States; $56,069 is the national average, as opposed to Utah’s average of $46,571. Our teachers, even at beginning salaries, should not be eligible for welfare.

Our class sizes are another point of discussion. Please consider this statement:

The ration of students to teachers must not be confused with average class size, which is the number of students assigned to a classroom for instructional purposes. Class size and student-teacher ratio are very different concepts and cannot be used interchangeably. According to recent studies, the difference between student-teacher ration and average class sizes in K-3 is 9 or 10 students. (Sharp, 2002)

Utah’s S/TR is set at 22.4; so this gives an average class size of 31.4 to 32.4 students per class. This is absurd, to say the least. Not even the most talented K-12 teacher can educate 30 children in a classroom effectively. One of our primary goals should be to reduce actual class size. The average S/TR in the United States is 16/1, which yields a class size of 26/1. This would be a good starting point for Utah to achieve. 

You mentioned Wyoming’s educational funding in your op-ed, I would like to expand upon that. One of the (major) reasons Wyoming can put so much more into education than Utah is willing to afford, is the extractive tax. Wyoming views it’s minerals as a resource owned by all the people, and therefore taxes extraction to benefit all the citizens. Utah can, and should, increase the mineral extraction tax; for example, coal in Wyoming is taxed at 3.75% (underground) or 7% surface, while Utah has no tax on coal extraction. (Source: The Council of State Governments, http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/7.15_2013.pdf, retrieved July 6, 2015)

This money could be used to offset the effect of returning 100% of the state income tax to funding public education, and in fact could be used to increase our educational funding to national averages.

I do admit, Senator, establishing this tax would be a very hard sell, given the mind-set of most of Utah’s legislators.

Charter schools, in my opinion, are another drag on our educational system. While I realize they are very popular with our legislature, I feel (and on this subject I have only anecdotal information) charter schools serve no educational purpose that is not met by the public system. Charter schools can reject any student, and send them back to the public schools, but they get to keep the funding for that student for the school year. This, in effect, boosts the revenue per student in the charter school, while cutting the revenue per student in the public system, thereby exasperating the public school funding issue. Charter schools exist, in my opinion, only so “my” child does not have to be in a classroom with “those” children. My solution is simplistic: close the charter schools; if parents want to pay for private school education, certainly that is their option.

To address the matter of accountability, I would propose that the State Board of Education consist of educators, not only on the K-12 level, but also college/university educators. They should be advised by members of the business community, who can use their knowledge to drive education to the curriculum needed to prepare students for college, and to compete for good, well-paying jobs. In this vein, we also need a robust trade school sector that can offer good careers for those who do not want college, or would not be successful in obtaining a college degree. The State Superintendent of Education should be held personally responsible for the success or failure of the school system.

Given the above, I would like to see the Utah legislature commit to a 5-year plan to achieve the following goals:

1)     Increase per-pupil funding to the national average;

2)     Increase teacher pay to the national average;

3)     Reduce class sizes to the national average.

Senator Debakis, I appreciate your progressive stance on education, and your willingness to open the much-needed discussion on our educational system.  I wish you the best in reforming our current educational system.

Respectfully,

Robert M. Hartman

Your comments are welcome, as always.