TABLE 3*.—PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF STATE AND LOCAL EXPENDITURE FOR PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, BY GOVERNMENTAL SOURCE OF FINANCING, BY STATES AND REGIONS, 1971-72 (Dollar Amounts in Millions) 34 ALTERNATIVES FOR FINANCING THE PUBLIC LIBRARY NA (Census data incomplete). Source Library data computed from U.S. Bureau of the Census, "Governmental Finances in 1971-72" and "State Government Finances in 1972. School data from National Education Association, Estimates of School Statistics, 1972-73, Research Report 1972-R12. Alaska Hawaii *See Technical Note at end of this chapter. 36 ALTERNATIVES FOR FINANCING THE PUBLIC LIBRARY All 1,000,000 500,000 TABLE 4. PER CAPITA AMOUNTS OF SELECTED MUNICIPAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BY POPULATION-SIZE GROUPS, 1970-71 Less to 999,999 300,000 200,000 100,000 50,000 to 199,999 to 99.999 than Number of municipalities, 1967 18.048 6 21 21 17 88 231 17,664 Population, 1970 (in thousands) 132,004 18.771 13,595 7,967 4,233 11,918 16,129 59,387 INTERGOVERNMENTAL FISCAL FACTORS 37 demands they have had to satisfy. The library service has apparently suffered when set against rising crime rates and the need to minister to an increasingly disadvantaged population. Property Tax Base and Inter-Area Disparities Local financing of libraries depends on the property tax base even more than does school financing. As was noted earlier, 87 percent of non-Federal library financing is from local revenue sources, while local governments finance only 46 percent of the non-Federal school bill. It follows, then, that library financing is subject more dramatically to the same inter-area disparity situation pointed up regarding school finance in numerous court cases. Briefly-as typified by the California case of Serrano v. Priest-the state courts have held that, because of the uneven distribution of the property tax base among taxing districts (specifically school districts), heavy use of property taxation to finance schools violated the state constitutional mandate that all children in the state are entitled to equal educational opportunities. In other words, the quality of a child's education should not depend on the wealth of his parents and neighbors. 10 Ample evidence has been amassed concerning the maldistribution of the property tax base within states, both in connection with the school finance cases and by the President's Commission on School Finance. As Table 5 shows, the Commission on School Finance found some tremendous inter-district variations in the taxable wealth (assessed valuation) behind each pupil. Similar relationships would apply to per capita assessed valuations relative to total population. These variations in property tax capacity are equally strong factors in producing comparable inequites in the present system of library financing. The same situation would apply to the financing of all public services that depend heavily on the local property tax base for their support. Non-Property Tax Revenue and Special Library Financing Systems Local governments derive a considerable portion of their revenue from sources other than the property tax. In 1970-71, all localities obtained over one-fifth of their own-source general revenue (i.e., excluding state and Federal aid) from service charges, interest earnings and other non-tax revenues. Municipal non-tax revenue was even greater, comprising over one-fourth of own-source general revenue.11 Overall figures on non-tax revenue are not available for libraries. The Office of Education, however, provides data for library systems serving areas with at least 25,000 inhabitants. According to these data, for 1968, 1,057 libraries reported charges and miscellaneous revenue of • Alabama TABLE 5.-SCHOOL DISTRICT PER-PUPIL PROPERTY VALUATION DISPARITIES, BY STATE *Locally assessed valuation is used for these states. Otherwise, equalized assessed valuation is used. Source President's Commission on School Finance, Existing State School Finance Programs," Vol. II, p. 14; Washington, |