Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Thanks for keeping your chin up

Thank you for remaining optimistic about the situation. I think the small town atmosphere evaporates as we wait at the traffic signals at intersections each day through three cycles just to get around town. The resident count is not small town anymore. I still see lots of parental involvement in the schools and I do not think that will fade but frankly, the numbers make it impossible to feel close to an entire community.

One of the things that has been missing in the equation is dynamic leadership either by an individual or group. Dr. Ross was... like him or not... a very strong leader and it did give identity to the schools and community in a very unique way. Mr. Yocum had a different style, nuff said. Since we will be looking for somebody new, maybe we will be blessed with positive dynamism once again.

If the board continues to get along, you can fill that role as I believe it is sorely needed. So many great ideas have been lost through the bickering. Since Mrs. Carlier departed, it has appeared to be a breath of fresh air in public persona at least.

Once again thank you for your efforts to reach out to the community.

Key issue - keep kids together

The key issue in the school boundary decision should be keeping children together as they move from building to building, and if a split must be made, minimize it. And certainly, don?’t aggravate the splits by doing them at fourth/fifth grade, and again at six/seventh grade. This is the crux of the boundary committee guidelines #4, #5 (when interpreted to be consistent with the law) and #7.

The school board should NOT get into the business of political or social engineering via the schools and the establishment of school boundaries. (Aside: these topics are relevant in a classroom). The members of the school board were NOT elected to preserve the ?“small town atmosphere?”. They were NOT elected to implement a socio-economic bussing plan. They were elected to ensure that Pickerington has the best quality education a price the community is willing to pay. All schools should have the same high expectations and opportunities for a quality education for all students.

These other ?“factors in the decision?” are a distraction and they are inherently divisive. Divisive issues cannot help drive a community toward a consensus.

The school board should focus on education (including academics, sports, music, arts, etc), and not try to redress situations over which they have no control (including where people choose to live, and with whom they choose to associate). The school board cannot control the growth (and apparently, no one can), and they cannot dictate the socio-economic mix in new areas. Hence, any decision based strongly on these criteria will be poor decision.

Transportation issues in the district should not be a big driver in the decision. It is not a significant issue with the current schools, and cannot be worsened except for the most extreme of plans. However, the costs of various approaches to the schools should be calculated and considered. Of course, we probably should take into account that current growth patterns will turn SR 256 into a parking lot for much of the day, which means that busses crossing or traveling on SR 256 should be minimized.

boundaries

I personally would like to see the two schools balanced, to the extent possible, with respect to socio-economics and student population (including race, apt. vs. house, etc.).

I also agree that realigning boundaries frequently, to accomodate growth, is detrimental.

While neighborhoods should be kept together to the greatest extent possible, some of thesen large neighborhoods, with multiple sections (e.g., Summerfield), can almost be considered as separate developments.

I don't agree that the cost of bussing should be an overriding factor. If Glenshire and Summerfield children were to attend the existing high school, their bus rides would still be shorter than some of the kids that live in the Tussing Elementary area and who will attend the exsting high school.

Lastly, my children initially attended Pickerington Elementary and now go to Heritage Elementary. The transition was not difficult. However, Heritage's population will again be split between Diley and Harmon. So, kids are already being split and will most likely deal with the situation better than some parents. While I'd like to see kids flow together from elementary to middle school to Jr. High to High School, I realize it's impossible in this fast growing district. And, in some respects, having friends at both middle schools, Jr. Highs and High Schools, will help unite the community.

I think the school board has a tough job ahead in making the final boundary decisions. Unfortunately, there are those that will be unhappy no matter what the final decision is. I do think the board will act in the best interests of the students and community as a whole.

Boundaries dilemma

Dr. Rigelman,

Thanks for asking others for their perspectives relative to the HS /JR HS boundaries issue.

I appreciate your, and the rest of the School Boards members, struggles with this issue and have attended numerous board meetings where citizens have offered their opinions.

Rather than giving some definitive answer to the question, I?’ll state various important concerns. To begin with I?’m including a section of the PLSD District Mission Statement for the Districts owns web site ?–

2) We believe that our schools are responsible for the total development of each student in the following areas: mastery of a fundamental body of knowledge, vocational and practical life skills, physical and emotional well-being, ability to access and utilize technology, self-esteem, self-discipline and the ability to make responsible life choices, respect for individual, social and cultural diversity, creative expression, independence and critical thinking, career planning and development, direct contact with work situations and with people in various lines of work, basic economic literacy.


To be true to this Mission Statement it is important for the Board, the District, and the
Community as a whole to acknowledge that ?“total development?” includes issues of inclusiveness on multiple fronts of any diversity questions. Anything less than such is hypocritical. The points of confrontation relative to diversity stem backward toward the zoning decisions that create ?“niche?” subdivisions.

If Pickerington intends to be ?“one?” community with 2 separate High Schools, then the Community as a whole must come to terms over the tunnel vision of ?“neighborhoods?” versus the ?“Community?”. Many that follow how our growth has impacted the schools see that the idea of a K ?– 12 education with all the same children always together as a group is highly unlikely and that boundary changes are but another outcome of uncontrolled residential growth. I can understand the neighborhood concept within the early schooling years, but find difficulty with maintaining that approach with teenagers.

Next, the discussion of ?“costs?” (specifically as it relates to bussing) has been another point toward either one point of view or another. Costs in an explosive growth school district will never catch up and with bussing being our #3 budgetary expense maybe it?’s time to review all costs.

Dr. Rigelman, this bussing cost issue reminds me of the points that you fought so hard in the past. You very well pointed out our contract outsourcing of bussing costs in the past, with nothing but ridicule from a then board majority and administration. This district has ignored your words as well as the 97-98 Finance Commissions recommendations. However, we find bussing costs used to determine school boundaries. I now see the a neighboring district (Groveport) is pressuring their outsource provider to bring costs in line, while we continue to park our busses in Pataskala ?– outside our district boundaries. This bussing cost issue must be re-addressed by our board and district officials, but it should not be the weightiest factor in boundary determination.

You and other board members must provide equal opportunities across the whole district and you must stand by ?“total development?”, including that of the social (and inter-social skills) development of all of the children in this district as it is stated in the District Mission Statement.

Good luck with your, and the other board member?’s tasks.