|
|
To all the voters with the courage to vote no on issue 3, I applaud you. You have sent yet another message to our school board that they need to find another way to fund the ''Violet Township School District''.
Be prepared for the tales of woe from the likes of certain board members as she threatens to suspend busing, or sports, or band, or (gasp!) force the students at North to eat their lunches from paper plates rather than fine china.
Be prepared for a special election in August that will cost thousands of your tax dollars where they will try yet again to pass this levy.
Be prepared to see the school board website filled with pictures of the new township shools being built (with little regard for county infrastructure) and their claims of no money to run them.
Oh and by the way, Yosemite Pam... before you start running off at the mouth about what a horrible person I am. I voted yes on Issue 3.
By Central Mom
|
|
|
|
|
|
Different?
Central Mom -
Why do you only discuss the ''township schools'' ?
You conveniently leave out of your tirades that Sycamore Creek was designed first & Tollgate elementary is a mirror image of it with the exception of the middle school connection.
Those two schools don't seem so different. What's up with that?
By Violet Mom
|
|
|
Township schools
Tussing, Harmon, Lakeview, Pickerington North, two new schools at Tollgate and Refugee....
Diley and new school at Sycamore...
Would you care to enlighten us as to which of these two groups are in the CITY of PICKERINGTON and which are in VIOLET TOWNSHIP?
We have come to the point where the schools need to be seperated into two districts; Pickerington City Schools and Violet Township schools. Itm is very clear as to where the current school board wishes to invest our tax dollars.
By Central Mom
|
|
|
Last Time I looked...
Last time I looked the PLSD serves a LARGE geographical area that is ~ 38 square miles - it includes parts of Violet Township, Liberty Township, Baltimore, Reynoldsburg, Pickerington, Canal Winchester, Carroll & Columbus. Being a public school system law requires this district & all other public school districts to educate the students that reside within it's boundaries - municipality is NOT an issue, just if the child lives within the PLSD boundaries.
Seems to me you would look at the PLSD Boundaries to determine the locations needed for schools. Of course growth should be taken into account as well as current school locations.
Also pretty safe to point out that while it's clear we need additional buildings we as a community have NOT voted to tear down existing schools and replace them with newly built buildings. I have heard very few if any people go down this road. I do believe there is renovations detailed down the road in the Master Plan the school district is working on with the state. But the issue at hand was the fact that the student population has outgrown the existing facilities - so we needed additional facilities. This was on the ballot 4 or 5 times before it passed. This space was needed just to get the kids out of trailers & our heads above water - haven't been in all the schools but I have yet to see one that needs rebuilt.
I guess don't understand what you are suggesting, if you look at a map we have Tussing out northwest, Fairfield is north, Violet, Heritage & Pickerington are Central & Sycamore Creek is South. To say Tollgate is misplaced I guess I'd want to know where else we need another school. Maybe south east but it seems like they are placed so they aren't on top of each other.
Can you be specific as to where you think the schools should have gone? Where in the City would you need two elementary schools? Same question with a middle school.
The city has 3 elementary school, one middle school, one junior high & one high school - 6/14 buildings if you count all the new ones - that's 43% of the school buildings.
It's not economically feasible to tear down existing buildings to build new ones - is that what you want?
By Curious
|
