To The Editor,The latest article “SCC shares info on Prop J” does not add any new data that would deem it worthy of implementation. I appreciate the letter from Mr. Barton and respect the rights of everyone to express their opinions. We should all thank the Warren County Record for allowing everyone the opportunity to share them.Mr. Barton tried to share info from the “leadership group,” but it appears to repeat the same stale rhetoric. He did however, reference two areas I was not aware of. The Missouri Hancock Amendment that would “likely decrease tax rates as property values increase.” Obviously, I am not an economic academic, but it reads to me like it is a state tax initiative only. It has been around quite some time. Anyone seen a tax decrease? Experience tells me that when property values increase, along comes the assessor, property insurance company, etc.Also (from Barton’s letter), the “Fast Track Workforce Incentive Grant,” which like SCC doesn’t focus on specific training required for existing local needs. Both address technology requirements which may or may not materialize in the state, much less the Warren County area.The crux of my letter was to get out of the habit of spending other folks’ money by looking at alternative solutions, flexibility, and use/redirection of existing resources while stimulating creativity. In my opinion, SCC is in reality a tax-supported business. Like other tax-supported entities, it could become a non-ending/increasing tax burden.Successful businesses have a conservative approach, continual process improvement and proof testing, cost analysis/control, etc. If SCC is already participating in educational partnerships with local schools and businesses, who is paying them? Why not build on that relationship with a two year evaluation test period.SCC could provide their own funding (putting some skin in the game) and all the advocates and growth promoters along with our school system providing facilities. Our school system is only using the facilities (which we have already paid for) four half-days a week.Surveys are a valuable approach to good planning, if they are used properly. If SCC surveyed 12 local businesses, why only identify the input from one? For some reason it was not a comprehensive survey report, especially since it did not survey the citizens/public.A meaningful survey could provide valuable analysis and planning data. For example, who would participate (at a tech school)? If not, why? Which tech would you prefer? Class schedule? Education history? Age?Yes it’s a lot of work, but a better chance of getting it right. We are surrounded by folks who think they are qualified to know what’s best for the populace. Us old folks think, why not just ask? Remember the “college gold rush?”I think that most seniors are perplexed. Some have paid school taxes 60-plus years, some never using the system directly or indirectly. Some also feel that the soup kitchen and childcare is a bit over the top.Meanwhile, we continue to seek ways to survive rising taxes and costs of living until we die. As for SCC and sponsors, a plan is only complete when it addresses all aspects of who, what, when, where, why, how and how much. Some of us do not think we should increase taxes until we review a complete plan.Paul HarperWarrenton