What's missing from this editorial?

This was found in today's Quill.

Endorsements on
selected ballot issues

Prop. C rollback: Yes, but...

The question of the Proposition C rollback on Missouri ballots on Tuesday may be the most serious ballot proposition involving state primary and secondary education we will face in our lifetimes.
Whether the vote is affirmative in all 113 school districts will speak volumes about how much Missourians care about the future of our schools and the education of our children.
The rollback of voter-approved Proposition C, passed several years ago when Missouri was flush with money, is necessary to maintain the level of excellence in our public schools, never mind improving it.
Visiting briefly the arguments against approving the ballot issue faced by voters in those 113 Missouri districts, including those in the The Quill’s circulation area, it may be well to do so from the point of view of West Plains R-7 voters. R-7 voters face all of the issues involved in the other districts plus a couple which may be unique.
First is the issue of whether passing the rollback will keep South Fork Elementary School open. At this point no one knows. That should be viewed as an issue separate from the Prop. C rollback, but it is clear that if the rollback doesn’t pass that will be the last nail in the school’s coffin - plus it will penalize students in the rest of the R-7 district’s schools.
Next is the question of whether a “yes” vote will give the R-7 Board and others a blank check to raise tax levies at-will. No. Each district will have no wiggle room beyond what the state says they can raise their levies each year based on what the state auditor allows - which most often is a single percentage point or a fraction of a point. Any raise above that figure would have to be approved by district voters.
Has the R-7 Board (and other boards) mismanaged its resources? I don’t think so. Although I sometimes disagree with how schools spend their money, that is a matter of a difference in philosophies rather than any suggestion of mismanagement.
The fact that 113 school districts in the state’s 114 counties have asked their patrons to roll back the provisions of Proposition C indicates the problem is just what schools say it is: declining state revenues. And, of course, some point to votes for such proposals as Proposition C and the Hancock Amendment, approved by a majority of Missouri voters, as part of the problem with state finances.
The bottom line here is that it is unlikely that all 113 school districts asking for the rollback are mismanaging their resources. More likely we Missourians, most of us, have had a greedy hand in mismanaging the state’s resources.
And it is noteworthy that not all West Plains area districts are asking for the rollback.
Schools such as Howell Valley and Richards have broad tax bases because their districts include much commercial property, not necessarily because they are much better managed than their fellow districts. That is another factor which speaks to a wider problem than possible mismanagement as a source of financial trouble in 113 Missouri school districts.
You have noticed that in the headline over this endorsement I have urged a “yes” vote for the rollback, but I have also included a “but” with the endorsement.
The “but” is this: If school district patrons want to be sure their boards are managing their tax money properly, and they want a say in questions on curriculum and other school matters, they should attend school board meetings in person or form “watchdog” groups to attend as their representatives.
Quill reporters and/or editors attend all R-7 Board meetings and as many other area school board meetings as they can, but there is no substitute for patrons attending to find out first hand what is going on with both their kids and their tax dollars.
Every parent-teacher organization could appoint representatives to attend meetings on their behalf, not waiting to get involved only when issues arise which have an immediate effect on their children or their tax money.
In the case of the R-7 meetings, for example, watchdogs could take the list of 41 of 43 cuts the board already has made and make sure it adheres to its decisions, or question why it doesn’t. In fact, up-to-speed observers would be in a position to recommend further cuts and economies, as well as ask questions and make suggestions in other areas.
Quill reporters say that absent big, hot issues, most school board meetings attract only those who have to be there and a teacher or two. Problems which lead to ballot issues such as those on many of Tuesday’s ballots do not appear overnight, and if more parents were more involved in their school districts some such problems might be met long before they become emergencies.
The current issue is not something about which school district patrons likely could have done much, but the principle of more parent involvement in school issues is sound.

Know what's missing from this editorial? The taxpayer. You won't find the word even mentioned in it.