Middletown Ohio


Find us on
 Google+ and Facebook


 

Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us
Thursday, March 28, 2024
FORUM CITY SCHOOLS COMMUNITY
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - No Tax Increase
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

No Tax Increase

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
Author
Nick_Kidd View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident
Avatar

Joined: May 15 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 112
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Nick_Kidd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 25 2010 at 11:14am

Our new Super doesn’t have to improve our schools or raise test scores, all he has to do is get a few levies passed. If he can get levies passed, he will be given bonuses and a contract extension no matter what has happened about school performance. That was what happened with Price. Some school board members that now blame our failing schools on Price, are the same ones that voted for his bonuses and contract extension. They saw “no compelling reason to change” Supers.

Also this all or nothing permanent levy is like going to Vegas and betting everything on one roll of the dice. If they get lucky they’re set for life. The only difference between the schools and us is that if we lose such a gamble, we’re finished. If the schools lose the gamble, they will be back again and again until they win. Let’s vote down the levy and let them come back with a levy that is not permanent. That is the only way we can demand that the schools educate our children. Rewarding failure with a permanent levy will only get us more failure.

Government is not the answer to problems, government is the problem.
Back to Top
tomahawk35 View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident
Avatar

Joined: Nov 18 2008
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tomahawk35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 25 2010 at 10:26pm
Well, Since nobody will approach this board and explain why a perament levy is wanted, I guess I will explain in my own opinion.
The ones in charge know that there will be very little or no improvement in the school system in the next 3-5 yrs and the chances of coming back and asking for more money would be a shot in the shot.. Hell, the new Supt contract expires in 3 yrs. and they will be rushing around trying to create another great sales pitch to dislodge more money from taxpayers. 
There is no logical reason for this except that they take all of us for total idiots. Well this is one idiot you won't get a yes vote from and I hope more voters will wake up and see this is no more than a snake -oil pitch which it had no value or cured anything.
Back to Top
LoveToTeach View Drop Down
Outsider
Outsider


Joined: Apr 23 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LoveToTeach Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 9:55am
The reason schools are putting conversion levies on the ballot:
http://www.iuc-ohio.org/pdf/strickland_plan.pdf

See page 6.
Back to Top
LoveToTeach View Drop Down
Outsider
Outsider


Joined: Apr 23 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LoveToTeach Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 10:01am
Current formula to calculate tax revenue uses “phantom revenue”
• Currently, when the state calculates how much tax revenue a local school district has, the state
uses phony numbers, often referred to as “phantom revenue.”
o For example, in many school districts, rising property values do not produce additional
property tax revenue. However, the state formula for school aid assumes districts
receive additional revenue. This formula is not logical, and it results in many districts
being punished because the formula says they have an abundance of phantom dollars
that don’t actually exist.
Establish an effective system of funding that accounts for local resources
• Under the Governor’s plan, the state will no longer ask school districts to pay their bills with
phantom dollars
• Instead, the plan lowers what local taxpayers are expected to contribute to local schools from
23 mills to 20 mills.
o The state will assume responsibility for providing the difference between what those 20
mills raise and the cost of the full range of education resources our students need
according to our evidence-based approach.

Use of conversion levies will allow districts’ revenues to grow
• Districts will have the option of asking voters to pass a conversion levy, which maintains the
existing millage on residential property for a district currently above 20 mills.
• Districts that use a conversion levy, and all districts whose tax structure already allows growth
on 20 mills, will see their tax revenues grow with increased property values, helping schools to
keep up with inflation.

State share of education funding will reach unprecedented level
• In the upcoming two-year budget, the Governor’s plan will take the state’s share of education
funding to an unprecedented 55 percent.
• When the funding plan is fully in place by fiscal year 2017, the state’s share of local school
budgets will reach 59 percent.
• Upon full implementation of the plan, the state will have unquestionably met its constitutional
requirement to its children.
Back to Top
LoveToTeach View Drop Down
Outsider
Outsider


Joined: Apr 23 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LoveToTeach Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 10:11am
Keep in mind that the state has established an amount just over 5,000 dollars a year to adequately educate one child. This plan establishes this minimum amount, no more than that.

If you look up the rest of the governor's plan, the school districts will be forced to be fiscally responsible and held very accountable for educating every child in their district.

Voting No on this levy will reduce per pupil funding far less than the minimum. You could let go of 10 administrators and save only a fraction of what our district will have to cut.

This levy isn't about raises or keeping excess administrators in their jobs. It is about meeting the basic educational needs of each child, while providing opportunities for enrichment. (Which is ultimately what we all want- higher expectations and higher student performance.)

Back to Top
Marcia Andrew View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jan 09 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Marcia Andrew Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 10:46am
Tomahawk, the short answer is that a change in state law on school funding now allows school districts to be honest about the fact that there will always be a need for a basic level of funding for the schools.  If the need will always be there, and voters generally approve renewals that don't ask for new money, then why go through the disruption and bitterness and distraction from learning that happens every time we have to ask the voters to renew levies to continue the existing funding level?
 
Longer answer: School tax levies do not increase with inflation.  When property values rise with inflation, the taxes collected by schools do not rise. But, the costs of operating schools definitely do rise. In the past, school districts that needed more money due to inflation had to go to the voters with short-term levies that the legislature called "emergency" levies, because (as the post from Love to Teach refers to) if the levy was put on as a permanent levy, it would reduce the amount of dollars the state contributed to the local schools, due to the complex, irrational funding formulas (and the local schools would not end up with the full benefit of the local property taxes paid by residents).  
 
But "emergency" levies could raise additional funds without reducing the state contribution.  So most districts in Ohio put emergency levies on the ballot, even though there was no emergency--school boards knew the need for more money was coming, and they knew that the need for the additional funds was not temporary. These are operating expenses that repeat every year (salaries, utilitites, fuel for buses, etc) not one time expenses.   Prior Middletown school boards did not say there need for the funds generated by the two expiring "emergency" levies was temporary, although I can understand how a voter might assume that from the word "emergency."
 
A recent change in state law allows a "continuing" levy which has no fixed number of years, but the revenue from the levy will not be used to reduce the state share of funding.  This substitute levy is a fixed sum levy, so if property values go up, the amount collected by the district will not go up.  The district could benefit if NEW construction or development occurs, those properties would be taxed a proportional share that would be in addition to the fixed sum.  Given Middletown's economic situation, we do not expect the levy to generate much additional revenue as we don't expect much new construction or development in Middletown.
 
The school board has been aggressive in cutting costs and controlling expenses, cutting at least $5 million out of the budget in the last 4-5 years.  That includes eliminating more than 12 administrative positions and at least 20 support staff, becoming more energy efficient, renegotiating third-party contracts, and many other examples.  However, despite all those efforts the budget has basically remained flat, because of pay and benefits, which amount to more than 70% of the budget.  No Child Left Behind Law basically requires all teachers to get masters degrees within a few years of starting out. This was laid on top of the universal, long-standing salary structure for teachers that gives step increases for increased education and additional years in service. So, even in years where there is a salary "freeze" (no increase in base salary), the payroll cost to the district still goes up as some (but not all) teachers hit a new salary step.  We have been dedicated to careful spending, yet I cannot foresee the operating needs of the district going down. The best we can do is to keep them flat.
 
So, the continuing nature of the levy has nothing to do with the new superintendent or the length of his contract.  The fact that you and others on here want to complain that he "only" has a 3 year contract just leaves me frustrated.  To start with, 3 years is standard.  If we agreed to a longer contract and he didn't work out, you all would be yelling and screaming about how irresponsible it was for the board to tie the district to a longer contract.  If he is doing a good job, we can extend the contract.
 
And whoever started the rumor that the new superintendent is not looking to buy a house in Middletown is flat wrong.  He is working with John Sawyer.
 
Marcia Andrew
Back to Top
Bill View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Nov 04 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 710
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 11:22am

Marcia, an issue that is behind many of the complaints is the issue of salaries/benefits and the teachers' union.  Can you elaborate on how "we" negotiate with the union, when is the next contract due, who ...if anyone...will ever fight the union to put the brakes on the runaway train of step increases, increases based on relatively useless masters degrees (do they make a poor teacher a good one?  I doubt it), the tenure joke, benefits, etc.

Back to Top
VietVet View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VietVet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 11:38am
Love To Teach- you state (under the Governors plan) "the plan lowers what local taxpayers are expected to contribute to local schools from 23 mils to 20 mils". Does this statement imply that we taxpayers will be paying LESS to the schools in the future since the milleage is reduced?

Also, you state in your post under use of conversion levies.....will allow districts' revenues to grow- "Districts that use a conversion levy, and all districts whose tax structure already allows growth on 20 mils, will see their tax revenues grow with increased property value, helping schools to keep up with inflation". We all know that the probability of property growth here in Middletown in little to none for many years at the rate this town is progressing. That means, according to the above statement, that due to no property value increases, the schools will not see revenue growth through property value increases so will we be bombarded with levies to "help the schools keep up with inflation"?

It looks like, with the state contributing more in the future (up to 59% by 2017), the Middletown schools can get the bulk of their money from the state and won't bother us with levies all the time- right? OR, will they still keep asking for more even though their monetary appetite has been quenched by the state?
Back to Top
VietVet View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VietVet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 11:43am
Ms. Andrew- why doesn't the school board do a better job on behalf of the taxpayer/property owner, to represent us in negotiations when the school union gets out of hand with their demands? Why does it appear to us citizens that the school board seems to "lay down and die" and not take a stand against some of these union tenure, step increase, days off, master degree upgrade etc. demands? OR, does the public have the wrong impression about what happens in these negotiations?

Thank you, in advance, for your explanation.
Back to Top
Marcia Andrew View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jan 09 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Marcia Andrew Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 12:36pm
Bill and Vet, you both asked about negotiations with the unions. 
 
There are two separate unions--the Middletown Teachers Association (MTA) which represents teachers, and the Middletown Classified Employees Association (MCEA) which represents support staff.  Administrators are not represented by a union.  There are also a few employees (like secretaries) who are not represented by the MCEA but are covered by the civil service rules for public employees.
 
The contract with the MTA was last negotiated in 2007 and it is a 3 year contract so it is up for negotiation again this year.  The MCEA contract is also 3 years and was last negotiated in 2008.  Generally the MCEA follows the increases (or freezes) agreed to with the MTA.
 
I can't speak directly to negotiations prior to 2007 as I wasn't on the board then.  I do know that the MTA is part of state and national teachers unions from which they take their positions, and that the Middletown teachers contract is very similar to contracts with other school districts across Ohio and the nation.  The uniformity of these contracts restricts the ability of any one school board from changing the status quo.  Schools need to stay competitive to attract decent quality teachers. 
 
You don't hear much about the negotiations because federal labor law prohibits us from saying much about the substance of the negotiations.  There are negotiaton teams for each side. In the past, no school board member has been on the negotiating team, but that could change.
 
In 2007, we negotiated smaller percentage increases in base pay (compared to budget forecast, and compared to prior contract), and doubled the amount of health insurance premium the teachers must pay.  We wanted to modify the step schedule, but the union wouldn't even discuss the issue.  So, I do not agree that we "lay down and die."
 
Normally, negotiations would have begun already at this point in the year.  However, if the levy fails, the district has no money. Even if it passes, it is just a renewal, so where is there any money for raises? We asked the union to extend the existing contract for one year with no increase.  This would also give the new superintendent time to learn the district and whether there are any non-monetary issues that need to be negotiated. To my knowledge, we have not received a formal response yet.
 
Marcia Andrew
Back to Top
Marcia Andrew View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jan 09 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Marcia Andrew Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 12:44pm
I should also add that pensions and tenure are mostly set by state law.
 
State law requires school districts to contribute 14% of gross salary (on top of gross salary paid to the teacher) to the State Teachers Retirement System, and each teacher is required to contribute 10% of their gross pay into the STRS. After that, the amount of the benefits is set by STRS and paid by STRS.  So this is not something under the control of the local school board.  FYI, your state legislature is considering requiring school districts to contribute an additional 2% of gross pay -- where do they think that money is going to come from? Not from the state, for sure.
 
Tenure rules are also governed by state law. Governor Strickland made some changes that will be taking effect soon, increasing the number of years before a teacher can get tenure, and trying to establish a more professional progression along a track of increasing levels. Again, not much can be done at the state level. When a district has to cut staff, the cuts affect the least senior, and therefore least expensive, employees.
 
Marcia Andrew
Back to Top
sportsnut View Drop Down
MUSA Immigrant
MUSA Immigrant


Joined: May 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 36
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote sportsnut Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 12:53pm
Have any of the potential NO voters that are fed up with the same ole, same ole from Middletown City Schools spent any time with the new Super to get a feel for what his plans are to make this a better school district? Or is your attitude same ole, same ole because that is much easier?

I would encourage any of you to meet the man - find out what he sees for the future of this district. I think you will be pleased with how different he is from the former Super and the direction Middletown City Schools is moving.
Back to Top
Pacman View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2612
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pacman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 3:02pm
Back to Top
VietVet View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VietVet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 3:03pm
Ms. Andrew- once again, a quick response ladened with valuable information for the average citizen. It is much appreciated by myself and, I'm sure others. It is interesting to hear that there is no representation on behalf of the taxpayer included in the negotiations. I don't see where we property owners have a voice and we are supplying the money, either through the state contributions or local property taxes. If anyone should have a major say-so in how much the education people will receive as to bennies, pay, step increases, etc, IMO, it should be a strong representation of the people. How did they leave out on of the most important components in these meetings....the money providers

You are correct. By your description of what transpired in the last negotiations, it would appear that the money-providers had a representative voice at the table, although I'm a bit frustrated knowing that negotiations are not controlled district by district, but rather statewide by the teacher's union. They are not invincible as AK proved a few years ago. The teachers can be replaced by equal, competent ex-military instructors who have taught at military installations. They could also help in the classroom dealing with the discipline issues. We aren't necessarily held hostage by the current "retain the good teachers mentality" are we? Aren't there alternatives? Some, NOT ALL, teachers that have worked their way up to the masters degree and with some years in the classroom become complacent. Personally, I'd rather have a younger teacher with a desire to do well than a "seasoned- tenured" teacher that is just "putting in their time to retirement" or has "retired on the job". Do we have a certain quota of "seasoned" teachers that Midd. is required to keep on staff or could we have a majority of younger ones? We need to break the apparent "stranglehold of demands" that is apparently holding the schools hostage in these negotiations. JMO
Back to Top
Bill View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Nov 04 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 710
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 3:45pm
watched the TVM clip of new Super.....is it pronounced RasMYOOSsen or RasMUSSen?
Back to Top
Marcia Andrew View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jan 09 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Marcia Andrew Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 4:52pm
Bill, it is pronounced RASmussen. Emphasis on the first syllable, and then "muss" not "muse."
 
Vet, I realize re-reading my post about negotiations, that I did not make clear that, although no school board member has been on the negotiation team in the recent past, the board members meet with the superintendent, treasurer and legal counsel for the district, who are all part of the team, before negotiations begin and as needed in between negotiation sessions, so that we are all agreed on negotiation strategy, the positions that will be taken and responses to union positions.  Ultimately, the board has the final say in voting to approve or reject the contract on behalf of the district.  Similar to the union having a negotiation team, but no contract is approved until the union membership votes and agrees to it.
 
So, the school board is supposed to be the voice of the taxpayer in these negotiations. I realize that may not be satisfactory to you, since you don't always (ever?) feel that the board is on your side, but that is the was the system is set up. Representative democracy and all that.
 
Marcia Andrew
Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 7:43pm
The infinity circle just keeps continuing. Glad John has a prospect on home purchase. Formulas, cloaked federal "hush" negotiations as if they are qui tam claims, and such, do nothing to bring forth compelling rationale for voting yes. When commercial entities leave, more burden is placed on the tax payer. That is the problem in Middletown.
 
This isn't rocket science. 70% of money goes to overhead. Unless you are Goldman Sacshs, very private entities could absorb a 70% burden of overhead. These cuts referenced are so minor. Simply look at the numbers of assistant principles, pr Director, and so forth. Its a train gone amuck. It cannot be sustained. As someone stated, if you had a PH.D and wore pants, you could be hired as super in Middletown. Whether the new super wants to buy or not buy is his discretion.
 
I state this for the last time. For those whom have lived here all their lifes or have huge disposeable income, or rely upon patients and clients, they will vote yes, and have the signs in their yards. Those who believe its civic pride and have a child in the system, better to spread the cost around, so they support it- ergo- Smartman. For those who think and act like a business owner, an investor, and what return is given when there is so much waste and now the city suggesting it may go bankrupt, whe no services are provided,- what signal and message does that send to others whom would want to move to MIddletown? Run like h***.
 
I think the passage of this levy is about 47-53 for opposed. I vote NO.      
Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 26 2010 at 8:05pm
Sidebar. And last comment as I am simply repeating myself as are others. Dr. Rasmusen states in his interview "as the city goes, so goes the school district." As the school district goes, so goes the city." Well, for the first point, I wouldn't be a dime on the city, let alone a levy with a YES vote. The school has had its time and chance. Dr. Rasmussen already being honest---it takes time. Anyone willing to wager on how successful Middletown is going to be, with its "bright future"? Its so bright, its facing bankruptcy if the 'public safety' levy isn't passed. Wink, wink.
 
As the two are interlinked, teethered, who would put any money on Middletown turning around? If it were a company, investors would be suing for fraud under SEC violations. As Dr. Rasmussen stated, "as the city goes, so goes the school district." The city trend line GOES toward bankruptcy. Voting YES does nothing to fix the city's problems which Dr. Rasmussen was so accurately aware. For those on the fence, just listen intently on Dr. Rasmussen's commentary on the direct correlation between the school and the city, and vice versa. The problem is, there are no jobs for anyone in Middletown, and the college grads are elsewhere, with a few exceptions. A most compelling statement was made by Dr. Rasmussen being very honest. The city does not deserve consideration for a YES. They didn't get it from the hospital, from AK sr. management, from First Financial, but expect it from the resident? Truly becoming comical.  
Back to Top
VietVet View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VietVet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 28 2010 at 6:22am
You can certainly tell that it is "going to the polls" time here in town. Last night, in rapid succession, received phone calls soliciting our votes for Issue 1, Issue 2 and felt special, until I realized it was a recorded message from none other than Susan Combs from the schools, asking our household to vote for the school levy, citing the standard rhetoric from the pro-levy folks. Susan's certainly earning her pay (isn't she the second highest paid person in the school system behind the super?) Thanks Susan, but I think you're in for a disappointment from our household on your request.
Back to Top
LoveToTeach View Drop Down
Outsider
Outsider


Joined: Apr 23 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LoveToTeach Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 28 2010 at 3:10pm
VietVet,

I don't think that you can say that ALL seasoned teachers are complacent.  I also don't think you can say that ALL young teachers are focused and dedicated.  I know of many middletown teachers that are seasoned and dedicated to their profession.  They are dedicated to their students.  Yes, many of them have furthered their education and have masters degrees.  I find it hard to believe that someone would not see value in the furthering of a teacher's education.  With so much new research in the field of education, how can you settle for a teacher who does not return to school and build on their knowledge as an educator? 

I would love to see a system that is set up to reward merits and education more so than years of experience.  A teacher's own professional development and accomplishments in the classroom are the pride of their craft as a professional.  However, I don't see this part of the system changing in the next few years.

If the levy fails, I do see a troubling trend that will surface once again.  Teachers who are good and can sell themselves elsewhere will leave.  They will either not have enough seniority and be let go due to the budget or will be unwilling to stay in a district that forces 35 students into one classroom with very little support.  We will be left with more of the unmotivated teachers that can't leave. 

I have made the point in my first post that there are many good things happening in our elementary schools.  I would also recommend listening to Mr. Rassemussen speak... if not meeting him.  I don't like the situation at hand.  I wish that state funding were better.  I have family also living here in middletown that can barely afford what they are paying.  I wish that we didn't have to ask tax payers to support a conversion levy.  The reality is that we do if we want to have a school system that has the ability to improve. 
Back to Top
spiderjohn View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2749
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote spiderjohn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 28 2010 at 4:37pm
I have remained quiet for a while, following the conversation.No point in trying to change the minds of  the regulars here, and I respect their thinking(which I have followed for years now).
 
As mentioned prior, I have a much better opinion of Ms.Andrew after spending a couple of evenings with her at pro-levy meetings. She comes off much better face-to-face, and does actually listen to outside thinking. It has been a pleasure working with her. This is HER levy--make no mistake. She has been in complete control from day one, keeping her circle very small.  It has been interesting to work with Ms.Alberico, Ms.Faenke and Mr.Packert also. I have no doubt as to their sincerity and commitment. During this time, I had no contact with other faculty,parents or students(which I thought to be somewhat odd).
 
I now wish that this replacement levy was for a shorter time frame--in the 3-5 year range in order to see how the new super interacts and if the current academic situation improves. But this is permanent(is anything REALLY permanent?), and imo is still the far best option now available.
 
I am not disagreeing with many things mentioned by Vet. I think like him on many of these issues, though with a different conclusion. acclaro is a bright person, who totally lost me in his last two postings.
 
Everyone could use a break from their current tax liabilities. We also have a poorly planned and marketed library levy(non-essential), and no doubt have municipal levys down the road(public safetey, streets, etc.)
Tax revenues are down. No surprise--most business income has dried up, and companioned with a lack of personal income. There is no transfusion coming any time soon.
 
Still--we have a local school system to operate, newer schools to feature, and a student base in dire need of proper educational opportunities. We MUST make them feel wanted and encouraged. To lose 26% of current funding would be devastating. EVERYONE understands this. A possible state takeover after resulting levy failure is a very crappy option imo.
 
We must lay the framework for the proper turn-around improvement in the Middletown school system.
We must properly fund the system. Do we have the right people operating the system and teaching the students? I hope so. Virtually everyone that I have met during this levy campaign has been someone that I have enjoyed, and that seems totally committed and capable of moving our system forward. Those that are not committed or capable can be easily purged, and that must also happen. We can replace school board members,administrators and teachers easily until we find the right mix. We cannot replace our structures, students or their parents. Instead, we must suppliment them mentally and financially.
 
Many assume that IF this levy passes, we will quickly return to business as usual, with new contracts providing the sos as far as raises and personel increases. I sincerely doubt that this will be the case.
A long-term public commitment through levy passage should well be the call to increased expectations as far as effort, cost containment, much more open public feedback/involvement, and the resulting improvement in academic performance. And in no way do I mean baby steps, or the kind of rationalizing that we have heard for years.
 
We must show confidence that things can and will improve. I don't see any other rational approach. If we anticipate things to drop lower and sink this levy, then things will definitely sink to a level far below acceptability to anyone.
 
So--the cost should roughly be the same, and we will shed the typical hypocrasy associated with every other "emergency" levy that we have watched evolve into something permanent.
 
We need to get this right as a community.
And when it is done, we must continue as if we are constantly working to impress everyone with performance, both financially and academically. A positive levy result will be tested daily, and measured by the public. Any return to the "old way" will be un-acceptable.
 
I realize that my posting is not the most warm/fuzzy type that you usually read in the local letters and elsewhere, signed by some local figure as if their endorsement means something above and beyond.
Spiderjohn is Everyman--a composite of fairness, hard work, family values, and decency to all.
Nameless, as his name is not important. His words and actions are all that truely matter, and they do the real talking for him, and everyone else like him.
 
So--to anyone out there still on the fence about this issue, I STRONGLY urge you to consider supporting this school levy. Support and the right approach will move us up and forward. It is OUR school system, and we WILL control everything about it through our voting and decisions on funding. Elected officials, administrators and teachers are only here to carry out our wishes. We must steer them in the right direction, supporting them when they are worthy, and eliminating them when they are not.
 
I hope that you choose the right reasons to vote, and to vote YES on this issue next Tuesday.
Back to Top
Mike_Presta View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike_Presta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 28 2010 at 6:43pm
Originally posted by spiderjohn spiderjohn wrote:

... Virtually everyone that I have met during this levy campaign has been someone that I have enjoyed, and that seems totally committed and capable of moving our system forward. ...
Spiderman:
I am quite surprised that you have not yet met the former President of the Board of Education,  Rev. Tyus!!! LOL LOL
 
Where I feel the campaign to pass the levy (in fact, ALL campaigns to to pass ALL levies in Middletown) has gone wrong is in underestimating the intelligence of "the people".
 

Every campaign brings out weasel words, misstatements, innuendos, half-truths, omissions, misdirection, and sometimes even outright lies.

It’s as if either the high-and-mighty feel that we “little people” can’t handle the truth, or they think that we are too stupid to recognize it when we are not being told the truth.

Or, perhaps they feel that their issues cannot bear up under the light of the truth?

Look back in this very thread. Witness the long, verbose exchange between Ms. Andrew and I wherein she began with the position that the “rate” of taxation under this levy could NOT rise, while I maintained that it could. It was like pulling teeth to finally get her to admit that the rate “could fluctuate slightly”. I can cite the ORC section where her “slightly” is defined as “a maximum of 4% per year” under certain conditions.

I am not trying to pick on Ms. Andrew--she seems like a fine lady, and more courageous than most public officials. The point is that it always seems to end up appearing that they were trying to hide something, and if they were trying to hide one thing, well, how do we know what else there is that we did not discover?

Look at all of the bull that Mr. Price, supported by his willing accomplices on the Board and in the administration, tried to feed us. Much of what he tried to sell was actually insulting!

Why not be HONEST, and if arguing the actual merits of the honest facts cannot pass a levy, then maybe, just maybe, it SHOULD NOT PASS.

Just as when liberals pretend to be conservative (or vice versa) on election day, if the truth must be twisted, or even abandoned, to get enough votes to carry the day, it SHOULD fail!!!

“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
Back to Top
Smartman View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jun 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Smartman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 28 2010 at 7:33pm
Spider, I could not agree more. A rge formal campaign manger for the past levies, this is Ms Andrew's campaign. But that is ok. It is important that it passes for the students and also for the community. Should it have been a renewal? Maybe. Its been on the books since 1985. Its 26% of the operating budget. Thats huge.
 
I just returned from Myrtle Beach with 50 of the finest students that I have ever had the opportunity to associated with. They funded the trip themselves. To some thsi may be the only opportunity to ever leave Middletown. If the levy fails the program that they are in will no longer exist. The program gives the exposure to scholarships and many other educational opportunities. Oh did I mention that these students are in the top 10% of thir class!
 
Look I know that we all get on here and voice concerns I do agree with many points. All I'm asking is that you consider voting yes. A no vote punishes the entire community. If we really want to change things, then vote yes and then form a group to go to Columbusan protest school funding. Thats the real problem. I would be willing to lead the charge.
 
Ok, now just go ahead and kick me in the balls and and tell em how stupid I am. I'm ready.
Ready set kick boys!
 
One final thought, maybe if Mr Wills have won the T-shirt battle and got his way, maybe he would be a supporter! lmo
Back to Top
Bill View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Nov 04 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 710
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 28 2010 at 8:00pm
well, my niece was on that Myrtle Beach trip and is definitely not in the top 10% of her class!  Confused
Smartman, while I will be voting YES, I think it's convenient for teachers to always blame Columbus for the gridlock on funding.  How about if the state teachers' union proactively came up with measures in negotiations to reward merit and punish poor teachers?  Why must we face situations where if levies fail, the things that get cut are bussing, sports, and younger teachers but NEVER the older ones, many of whom wish things were done the old way and are resistant to change and, therefore, part of the performance problem?
Back to Top
Smartman View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jun 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Smartman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 28 2010 at 8:17pm
The State Supreme Court deemed that school funding was unconstitutional. We attempted a state wide campaign on petitions in 2007 to force the state to assume the responsibility for school funding. We fell short of the number of signatures needed. Maybe now is the time to try again. Hope you neice had a good time on the trip.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.168 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com    Privacy Statement  |   Terms of Use  |   Site by Xponex Media  |   Advertising Information