|
|
We now have a school board that is constantly asking for money to build new schools. This is the result of years of allowing developers to run rampant in this community. It seems that this school board is less afraid of the taxpayers than it is of the developers and ther politicians on Pickerington City council. If the school board does not have the nerve to stand up for the community, then they are going to have to be forced to do so. Voters will likely refuse to pass the new levy because they have no assurance that this will be the last one. If fact, it is a pretty good guess that this will not be the last levy and that we can expect almost annual levies as long as the community continues to mushroom. As John Brinson pointed out, we are not even sure of the impact of the last school building levy on the taxpayer's pocketbook. Until the school board addresses the root of the problem, which is uncontrolled growth, they are not acting in the best interst of the children of this community.
The public would be more sympathetic if they saw the school board taking an active role in solving the problem through means other than begging the taxpayers for new money. First, go to Pickerington City council and Violet Township and demand that they both do something immediately to stop growth. Second, demand that City Council stop TIF'ing thier developer buddies and stop acting pathetically grateful when some developer promises to pay a hundred thousand dollars sometime in the future (maybe) when granted immediate tax savings of millions of dollar at the expense of your budget. Third, demand that the City fire Joyce Bushman. In her years of office she has done nothing other than encourage unbridled development. Could anything be more telling than the fact that the City hires the same attorneys as the developers. These attorneys, who repesent the city on the annexation issue, are now turning around and saying that they will sue the city on behalf of the developers if there is any attempt by the citizens to slow down growth. We need to find a City Manager who has a proven track record of standing up to developers.
On your own you might try to at least make some attempt at frugally spending the taxpayers money. Let's start with athletic facilities. Remember that athletic program exist solely to provide activities to the students. They are not the schools reason for existence, despite what the Athletic Boosters may be telling you, and the sun will still rise in the morning even if our teams lose a game or two or three or our band doesn't go to some exotic parade. Many school districts have teams sharing the same football and baseball fields. Perhaps we need only one fieldhouse for the time being. Perhaps the school adminsitration should be in portables again rather than the students. Do we really need a PR person for the school? The point is, it is hard to tell people whose companies are laying off people and cutting benefits that the school doesn't also need to tighten its belt. It is hard to stomach neverintending tax increases when your own retirement has been decimated.
Come On Wes, stand and deliver, or get of the way for someone who will.
By Lou Gosset, Jr.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deja vu in less than two years
Dear Lou (and others),
On October 16, 2000 I spoke before the then Pickerington Local School Board?’s members President Debbie Carlier, Vice President Lori Sanders, members Larry Sigman, Gail Oakes, and Bruce Rigelman. Since that time I have also met with current School Board President Wes Monhollen with a written copy of this earlier address. The words of that earlier address listed how our local school board has had to continue to come back to the voters for additional facilities and operating expenses on an all to frequent basis.
22 months, 77.5 million dollars in (2) additional buildings and a sports complex and 3 mills of operating funds later it?’s the same story.
It?’s worth repeating......
One year ago this School Board requested that local citizens approve an operational expense fund increase. A ?¼ % increases in the School District Income Tax that area residents pay. At that time Issue #11 promotional fliers stated on page -3-
Headed School Financing 101
?“How one student affects the financial picture of our school district.?”
?“Based on a $150,000 home value with $60,000 per year household income adding only 1 child:
- numerous calculations then lead to a statement that -
A Net annual loss per pupil of $1,813.00 would be realized.
During this same period of time, an incumbent board member stated,
?“A new high school will be needed in five to eight years, and a new junior high school probably will be needed sooner.?”
Early in the summer of 2000 Fairfield County Officials held a number of public information meetings regarding area growth. At these meetings copies of information were available about a Cost of Communities Services (COCS) study conducted by Allen Prindle, a professor in the Economics Department of Otterbein College.
In this study figures for various categories of land use were compared to their taxes generated in the ability to support the various community?’s infrastructures.
(Schools, roads, police, and fire to name a few)
Farmland?’s COCS ranged from $0.05 to $0.17 for every dollar generated in taxes collected.
Commercial/Industrial COCS ranged from $0.27 to $0.51 for every dollar generated in taxes collected.
Residential Development COCS ranged from $1.10 to $1.15 for every tax dollar collected.
This study concludes that growing communities need to balance both commercial/industrial developments with residential development or they will experience higher service expenditures compared to revenue streams.
Data from the Pickerington School District indicate that our residents were in the same predicament 10-12 years ago when bond issues for the current high school were being discussed. In that time we have built or renovated 6 facilities, a rate of one every two years. It has the appearance that we?’re on an endless treadmill, with a recurring cycle of building needed facilities as well as for additional operating funds.
During the fall of ?’99 one of the best statements of a then gubernatorial candidate was, ?“A tax increase without solving the problem is an unacceptable solution.?”
|
|
|
Deja vu in less than 2 - part 2
conclussion --
As an area resident I?’m tired of the treadmill.
The real question confronting our community is not whether, but how we will grow and change. This challenge requires a vision for the future, with elected officials and citizens changing our habits of the past. Moving from countless additional residential subdivisions toward a dramatic increase in viable Industrial and Commercial ?“neighbors?” within our school district boundaries will only take place if our #1 Industry ?– The Pickerington Local School District ?– takes the lead role. As School Board members you will serve today?’s and tomorrows students best by being the lead voice and drive in this change.
|
|
|
Look at what I propose to do!!!
Good thoughts, but look at my discussion and see how I propose to solve your problem.
|
