Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Extortion ?– YES


I disagree with you. You know and I know that the pay to play goes far beyond our kids and their extracurricular endeavors. The story proves that the levy committee has adopted the mindset of the board in that everyone has to pay to play in PLSD?’s sandbox. No buck? No luck!

Asking vendors and those that are associated with the district may truly not be illegal but the unethical question must be left to each of the voters. Slaven?’s contract was terminated how long ago? She is not in the employ of this district nor has she been for quite some time. Why then do you go lean on her? I think this is indicative of the level that this district will stoop to to get more money. How is her businesses success directly tied to the success of this district? Simply, it is not. Was this ransom demand sent in error? Possibly. But ask yourself this: where did the levy committee get the list of vendors? Did they dream it up? No, it came from PLSD whether from staff or the Board.

You also mention teachers. What you are saying is that you also think it would be a good idea to send a ransom letter to all the teachers. How about the kitchen help? How about the custodial staff? How about the bus drivers? How about the many coaches who aren?’t even teachers? Where do you draw the line? How far will you go in making even vague threats against people telling them their livelihood will be threatened if the levy fails? No buck? No luck!

I?’ve been on the fence about supporting this levy. I am upset that PLSD chose to build new school so far away from reality that the transportation costs will increase. I am upset that Mantia has hired so many more people to add to her ?“cabinet?” using her own word. Take Slaven for example. She provided a service with no strings nor overhead costs. They let her go only to replace her with an employee costing near $60K plus benefits. What does that come out to? Maybe closer to $100K? Is that a sound decision? Or is this just a ploy to hire more yes-men to surround the queen?

My decision is, as it has in the past, been based on my perception of how well the district uses the money they already take from me. I won?’t give them more until I am sure what they already have is properly used. Although this is the levy committee and not the board (supposedly) attempting this extortion, the apple never falls far from the tree. Leaning on people monetarily is a tried and true tactic of at least one board member I know. Since she staffed the levy committee I can?’t help but see her tactics being used by her hand-picked staff.

Shame on the levy committee.

Who really loses?

It's the kids that lose - yes the textbook company might not get an order for a new text book quite as quickly. Or Apple won't get an order for new computers quite as fast.

This community should be behind our schools - it's why we all moved here?

Who should pay for ballot initiatives for Public Schools? Unfortunately, as usual the Dispatch didn't do all of it's homework - how about a nice little chart with Dublin, Westerville, Hilliard, Worthington, New Albany - you get the picture with how these elections are funded. I don't think it's a secret, I bet there are a lot of commonalities.

This Committee you talk about is just parents & concerned taxpayers. They send notices out through the schools to volunteer on it - if you don't like it be part of the solution.

My questions

My questions concerning the article in today's Dispatch are these:

While Spokeswoman Amanda Morris is quoted as saying the district can't control what the campaign committee does, which is true, who from the district had input on the letter? Olshefski and the ''leadership team'' from the levy committee used to regularly meet with school officials to design strategy. Is that still happening?

Why a $1500 ''donation'' amount? Companies vary in size, and while some companies can easily afford to donate that amount, others would be burdened and probably wondering if it meant the PLSD no longer wants its business.

Who signed the solicitation letter?

Why send a letter to Barb Slaven? Apparently someone didn't double-check the list of vendors, or they would have seen and understood the error in sending a solicitation letter to someone who no longer works for the district. Or was it a way to insinuate that if she sends in the money she will get a job with the district?

Who else mistakenly received a solicitation letter?

Will Olshefski be stepping down as campaign committee chairwoman? Keeping her may be a fatal error for the November operating levy. I guess it really depends on how many people see today's newspaper and how many are offended by it.

After all, perception is reality.

The revenge of the PIO

This is probably why you see the dispatch shrinking in size and their subscriptions are decreasing. The ''This Week'' is only a few pages now and they have laid off a lot of reporters over the last year or so.

Clearly this article is inflammatory and says more about the Dispatch editors than it says about the Pickerington levy committee. The article is crafted with words like extortion only to make the story catch the eye of the reader. It caught mine this morning when I posted it. However with further reflection and other comments posted here, it shows a Dispatch that has its moral compass too close to a magnetic.

By Henry