Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Take Note & Change the Players!!

I agree - but we elect them. In some cases, over & over again. If we don't like how they play in the sandbox then we need to remember that at election time & NOT vote for the candidates that don't represent the Communities best interests !!

PLSD board tell the truth

1. ''I understand a complaint from the board is that the mandates issued by the state without funding. Yet we receive over 50% of our operating money from the state''. True or false?

2. ''Health costs are sky rocketing, So the obvious question is do the teachers make any co=payments like the rest of us''? True or False?

3. ''The short falls we now have in our budget were the direct result of an incompentent treasurer''. True or False.

4. ''If we build these two new elementary schools we can do away with the portable classrooms for 8 to 10 years''.True or false?

5. ''If this operating levy in November fails we will be in financical watch next year''. True or False?

6. Does the new high school that sits so close to Refugee Road look intimidating to the local tax payers? Do they wonder why all their hard earned money is going to build a monument of this magnitude? True or false?

7. Extra credit why is the grass growing on the football field when we have had such a dry summer? Has the school district placed a higher priority on the sports field rather than the classrooms? True or False?


8. Math question. How do you predict the growth rate of your school when you have local governments that rezone and annex at will with no controls over the rate of that growth then as a school board member you try to tell the voters what the growth with be 10 years from now. Are the school board members blowing smoke up our skirts? True or False.

9. Will you vote for this levy in November?

10. Will you change your mind if you knew that we would place our school district in financial watch if it fails? Do you believe the spin coming from this board? Is it creditibile? True or False?

Perfect score is ten out of ten

Does a perfect score of 27 out of 27 matter?

One Board Member's Response

You need to remember that the School Board is not a monolithic entity. Different Board members see things in different ways. For example, two members of the school board -- myself and Mrs. Oakes -- opposed just about every decision the school board made concerning the new high school and junior high school. I voted against the bond levy.

I believe that we are spending at least $10 million too much on these schools; that they have taken a year too long to bring on line; that the school board chose the wrong architectural firm to design them and, based on hindsight, the wrong firm to serve as construction manager; and that the ''minimal new millage'' bond offering that we have used to finance them is fiscally irresponsible in several different ways.

I also believe that, with Wes Monhollen's addition to the board, and with the resignations of our former superintendent and treasurer, we have a real opportunity to break with the past. The two new elementary schools, if approved by the voters, will be designed and built with economy in mind, and will be completed in significantly less time than schools typically have been in the PLSD. I also believe that the school board and the administration now see the need to budget operating revenues carefully, and to stay within the budget. You need to give us a chance.

There are, of course, still two members on the board from the old regime. If, however, they do not see the light, the voters can remove Mr. Sigman next November and Mrs. Sanders two years later.

With all of that having been said, let me turn to your questions.

By Bruce Rigelman

Continued

1. We do receive approximately half of our operating revenues from the state, and we do expend significant funds meeting state mandates for which no special state funding has been provided. I do not, however, see such state mandates as a significant cause of the PLSD's current fiscal problems.

2. The teachers do make co-payments, although I would like to see them increased slightly. I believe that the resulting premium reduction would more than offset the additional cost to our teachers and staff. I argued for this during the last round of negotiations, but made no headway with my board colleagues at the time.

3. Although it is well known that I had little respect for our former treasurer, and was glad to see him leave, the PLSD's current fiscal problems are not simply the result of his incompetence, although his mistakes and miscalculations are certainly a contributing source of our problems.

4. Assuming the school district continues to grow at no more than the same rate that it has, on average, during the past few years, we might be able to dispense with portables for that length of time. However, I think that the PLSD's rate of growth is likely to accelerate significantly. I have never seen so many subdivisions approved, and so much new ground broken, in such a short period of time. Given the City Council's irresponsible policies, all bets are off.

By my calculations, the PLSD will have a total student population, when fully developed, between 16,000 and 22,000. It all depends on density which, in turn, depends on whether the remaining land in the PLSD is taken up by starter homes crammed 8 to an acre, or somewhat larger homes, built 2 to the acre, with a proper mixture of commercial property.

5. Although nothing is certain, it certainly is possible, and perhaps even likely, that the PLSD could find itself on fiscal watch within the next 2 years if this fall's operating levy is not passed.

By Bruce Rigelman