|
|
As to the latest and greatest request for a levy from PLSD (YAWN!):
http://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/news/stories/20020222/localnews/1695015.html
http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/news/news02/feb02/1104990.html
Why do the stories you find at the links above insist that the school levy we will see on May 7th ballot is a NEW levy when the people from the district insist it is a replacement and we will see no additional cost?
|
|
|
|
|
|
what I experienced .....
As an attendee of the 2/11 Pickerington School Board meeting, I can tell you what I witnessed and heard. By a 5-0 vote of the Board members it was move and passed to place a RENEWAL 5 mill levy on the May ballot.
PATA has provided a web site link to the PLSD and the Board members and District have email address listed on that link should you have further questions. There is also an upcoming Board meeting on 2/28 7:30pm at the Junior High School Media Center.
I also read these same articles in the print media this morning and noticed the differences versus what I witnessed.
Perhaps the papers you've referenced would elaborate on an answer to your question.
|
|
|
Pick for Kids
Will the resurrected Pickerington 4 Kids committee be the only levy support group?
|
|
|
Renewal
I can assure you that the PLSD issue on the ballot this May is only for renewal of a 5-mill levy that otherwise would expire. This levy currently is collected at the rate of approximately 3 mills. That will not change due to passage of the renewal. Thus passage of the renewal will not result in any tax increase. The Columbus and Lancaster papers had it wrong.
Although I have opposed the last two PLSD levies, I support this one. I do not believe that the PLSD could sustain the loss of this tax revenue without seriously adverse consequences (and I do not reach such conclusions easily).
I also am hopeful that, with recent changes on the School Board and in the PLSD Treasurer's office, the PLSD will (at long last) significantly upgrade its level of fiscal responsibility. I see hope, in particular, for significant changes in the school district's budgetary process, which has been a sham for the five years that I have been on the School Board.
By Bruce Rigelman
|
