I did and you are still wrong!
Mark,
Have you been out in the sun today? Your deductive reasoning is failing you. First you say that Beachwood pays $5,228 to the schools from residential property. You also say that Pickerington only pays $2,790 to the schools from its residential property. What does those two figures have to do with the price of eggs in Boston? NOTHING!
Mark you pay real estate taxes on both residential and commercial properties. So if Pickerington only had residential properties within the school district and as a group we all paid $2,790 per student. I also believe our school currently has about 8000 plus students. What happens is we reduce the student population by 4000 and the number of homes paying real estate taxes remained the same. We would be paying more ($5,580) than Beachwood from the residential part of the tax bill now wouldn?’t we Mr. Uher? So how in the world can you reach your conclusion without knowing how many tax paying homes there are in the district or even the residential property valuation prior to reaching that conclusion. The article did state that they had 1,688 students.
SO MARK YOUR CONCLUSIONS ARE VERY WRONG!!!
Now that ratio is probably do to the fact that Beachwood has been able to control its residential growth rates to a reasonable rate. That means folks moved in and raised their children and stayed in their empty nester homes. You say they have a LOWER medium household income and then try to reach the conclusion that they are paying outrageous school Real Estate taxes. I doubt that the Beachwood School district is paying any more that Pickerington school district tax payers is per household.
NEW HOMES ATTRACT YOUNG FAMILES!
Have you got that down in your memory bank yet Mr. Uher? You have pointed out another reason why this uncontrolled residential growth is killing this school district. Here again the city of Pickerington has been issuing building permits at 9% growth rate the last two years. The Township has been below 4%. I am almost afraid to ask what the current year will bring. I believe the above figures will be much higher in both the township and the city.
AT WHAT POINT DO WE GET THROUGHT TO YOU MR. UHER ABOUT RESIDENTIAL GROWTH?
It is well beyond the time of trying to ask for lower density. We must stop this building dead in its tracts. If you want more money for the school children then your time will be much better spent asking these local governments to slow the residential growth down. Water and Sewer plants have been the catalyst for home building. So get ready for about another 5,000 homes and we will see the above figures per student go even lower and approach the state?’s safety net of $4,800.
By Joe Sixpack
Mark,
Have you been out in the sun today? Your deductive reasoning is failing you. First you say that Beachwood pays $5,228 to the schools from residential property. You also say that Pickerington only pays $2,790 to the schools from its residential property. What does those two figures have to do with the price of eggs in Boston? NOTHING!
Mark you pay real estate taxes on both residential and commercial properties. So if Pickerington only had residential properties within the school district and as a group we all paid $2,790 per student. I also believe our school currently has about 8000 plus students. What happens is we reduce the student population by 4000 and the number of homes paying real estate taxes remained the same. We would be paying more ($5,580) than Beachwood from the residential part of the tax bill now wouldn?’t we Mr. Uher? So how in the world can you reach your conclusion without knowing how many tax paying homes there are in the district or even the residential property valuation prior to reaching that conclusion. The article did state that they had 1,688 students.
SO MARK YOUR CONCLUSIONS ARE VERY WRONG!!!
Now that ratio is probably do to the fact that Beachwood has been able to control its residential growth rates to a reasonable rate. That means folks moved in and raised their children and stayed in their empty nester homes. You say they have a LOWER medium household income and then try to reach the conclusion that they are paying outrageous school Real Estate taxes. I doubt that the Beachwood School district is paying any more that Pickerington school district tax payers is per household.
NEW HOMES ATTRACT YOUNG FAMILES!
Have you got that down in your memory bank yet Mr. Uher? You have pointed out another reason why this uncontrolled residential growth is killing this school district. Here again the city of Pickerington has been issuing building permits at 9% growth rate the last two years. The Township has been below 4%. I am almost afraid to ask what the current year will bring. I believe the above figures will be much higher in both the township and the city.
AT WHAT POINT DO WE GET THROUGHT TO YOU MR. UHER ABOUT RESIDENTIAL GROWTH?
It is well beyond the time of trying to ask for lower density. We must stop this building dead in its tracts. If you want more money for the school children then your time will be much better spent asking these local governments to slow the residential growth down. Water and Sewer plants have been the catalyst for home building. So get ready for about another 5,000 homes and we will see the above figures per student go even lower and approach the state?’s safety net of $4,800.
By Joe Sixpack