Mary L. Seward’s suggestion for property tax reform in her column, “State teacher salary scale for property tax reform” (BDN, Sept. 25), is interesting, has merit and sounds plausible. It may be too simplistic.

If ballot Question 1A passes the state Legislature must immediately live up to the promise made in 1985 to fund 55 percent of K-12 public education costs.

Gov. Baldacci begs people to vote for ballot Question 1B, which would phase in the state’s funding of 55 percent for K-12 public education costs over several years.

The problem is that the state is short on funds, has been for too many years, to fully fund every mandated program. Consequently, one program is shorted to partly pay for another. How many Peters must be robbed to pay too many Pauls?

Public school teachers are under paid – a chronic situation since public school teachers came into existence. If, as Seward suggested, teachers are to be paid from state coffers shouldn’t other public school personnel also be paid from that source? If so, who will be the employer of those people – the state or local districts?

Where will the state get the finances that now come from local property taxes to pay those salaries? Perhaps an increase in sales tax?

Public education suffers from the same malady afflicting manufacturing businesses as a result of globalization.

Time honored ways of conducting business no longer fit in today’s world. In times past public school students needed only to learn reading and writing.

There will be no easy way for legislators to remove themselves from the “Catch 22” quagmire of how to fund K-12 education and all the other mandated programs. Will a knight in shining armor on a white horse please step forward?

V. Dana Allison

Castle Hill