How did you get to where you are today? Chances are you have at least one great teacher to thank for your success. Someone nurtured you and encouraged you, and as a result, you are now a proud, engaged and intelligent citizen. This is exactly our goal as teachers — to help and inspire our students to become the very best they can be. As Minnesota Teacher of the Year finalists and winners, we know all too well that our success, and thereby our students' success, is dependent upon financial support — something that is too often lacking.
In the midst of Teacher Appreciation Week, we are feeling unsupported by our own legislators. There is clearly money available to invest in education, with a state surplus of $1.9 billion, yet the general funding amount agreed upon in the House is even less than the current rate of inflation. The proposal for an increase of 0.6 percent to 1 percent in the funding formula is a far cry from the increase in costs our schools see each year. (Local school officials say it's more than 6 percent over two years.) Education is the only part of Minnesota's budget that is mandated in our state Constitution. Mandated, but not fully funded. In addition, the funding structure needs to be reexamined to ensure that districts are not disadvantaged based on geographical or socioeconomic circumstances.
Legislators, we need you to do better. We want our students to thrive, and we need to give them full support to do so. What will happen if you fail to provide this needed funding? Our schools will cut mental health counselors, who are so gravely needed right now. Teachers will be cut and class sizes will increase, meaning students will get less individual attention. Successful after-school and study-hall programs will be cut, so students will receive less help when they are struggling. Why not place a sure bet on our state's future by putting money where we really need it?
Thank you for your service to our state. We are counting on you to do the right thing for Minnesota's students.
This letter was signed by Tom Rademacher, 2014 Minnesota Teacher of the Year; by Amy Hewett-Olatunde, 2015 Minnesota Teacher of the Year, and by 2015 Minnesota Teacher of the Year finalists Erik Brandt, Melinda Christianson, Stephen Dombrosk, Lanka Liyanapathiranage, Kathryn Oberg, Ann St. Clair, Terrence Price, Rachel Steil and Meggie Trenda.
BUFFER STRIPS
Is it like 'taking' land, or more like assigning responsibility?
A May 6 letter writer could not have had it more wrong on who owes whom for the installation of buffer strips. His analogy to a government taking for roads, for which compensation is paid, is not only irrelevant but misleading. The buffer strips are intended in large part to stop the runoff from farms — of soil, of pesticides and of excess fertilizer. These are social and financial costs that farmers are offloading to the public. They take the form of spoiled rivers and lakes, no-swimming and no-fishing zones, and pollution cleanup costs (real tax dollars). Arguably, farmers could be charged for these imposed costs on the average citizen. The least they can do is to embrace Gov. Mark Dayton's proposal for the buffer strips.
Robert Lyman, Minneapolis
• • •
As a property owner, I am required to own and maintain a wastewater removal system on my property, and I am assessed for wastewater treatment. If improvements are made to the wastewater or rainwater runoff infrastructure adjacent to or near my property, I am either assessed or taxed. I don't agree with the opinion that land for runoff buffers will be in fact taken from farmers who border on the Minnesota River. I see that part of the farmers' property necessarily being employed to treat water that the farmer has polluted. That is the farmers' "assessment" for runoff water treatment. Perhaps that cost eventually will be passed on to consumers, but so be it.