|
|
select group
Taint no swimmin parents in that North booster group...they have not even hired swim coaches for the High School season which begins November 7th..we really know uherwhose tail is waggin this dog.
My high school in North Canton is still sharing athletic facilites since 1975 when they opened the second high school. They recently opened a third, but had to build new facilites because it is more than 12 miles away and it is hard to schedule three teams into a stadium. Yeah they just have one stadium that does football, soccer and track not two like the palace. Makes me wonder if we lack brain power in our adminstration....they have two at North...but cannot share? None of our parents begged for their own primo athletic facilities, they were grateful to have what we had and knew nobody would pass a levy to build athletic facilities when there was so much classroom overcrowding...are we just spoiled here...so spoiled we can't share?
By conversation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lights needed
In order to fully share both facilities, lights would need to be installed, at least at the soccer/football mini-stadium. You would either need to ensure the baseball/softball schedules had neither school with home games on th esame day (doable) or put lights in for them as well, just in case.
It was my understanding that the original plans called for lights at the smaller facility, but they were nixed because of costs. Sounds strange, but that is what I heard at the time. They also should have put in some type of pressbox.
Actually, if they had been smart(!) the facility would have the smaller stadium directly behind the football field, and with windows put in the back, the pressbox could have been used for both. Lights would still have been needed, but a better siting plan should have been considered.
By Twp Man
|
|
|
Lights
Lights have been discussed with the Board as I understand it.
The answer was unless it was being done at both schools it wasn't being done at North.
I don't think they see that as a viable expense for permanent improvement money.
I do know neither booster group has offered to pay for lights.
By North parent
|
|
|
Stop Look and Listen
Dear End of Conversation;
No vote did make some valid points. I guess if the objective of the school board is to get a bond issue passed to build a new school or schools they say they need for the children then why do they continue to bang their collective heads against a brick wall by proposing the very same thing each election?
Clearly the voters are rejecting them and they won?’t listen.
One issue that they do know is that the economy is in the dumper. They see it in their revenue collection and I am sure they have been told that in person. So if the price is too high for some voters then lower the price and build only one school. If the price is inflated because of the requirements for state assistance in funding then build a smaller square footage per student elementary school and lower the price.
It has been well documented on this site and in the news media that there is animosity from many in the district over the wasted tax dollars spent at North and not at Central. So how can a school administration that justified the Taj Mahal now say they don?’t want to waste tax dollars on the Central High School complex?
I see two reactions from people depending on where they live in the district. Those in the North seem to say the district wasted their money in 2001 and today we can NOT waste anymore money on athletic complexes after they have secured their complex for their children. Those parents and taxpayers in the Central District are paying taxes for a huge debt and their kids can?’t enjoy what a lot of that debt went for.
Now from a political stand point. I believe the levy campaigns have been split like 8,000 total votes with 5,000 votes against and 3,000 for the levies. That means they need to turn around a little over 1,000 voters.
That means if the school wants to pass a levy then by lowering the price from 2.5 mills down to 1.25 mills how many more of the voters would go for a lower amount? Could you get 500 of those voters to turn? Then there is the animosity of the Taj Mahal. If the school board planned for and proposed a modest football stadium/track at Central say a couple of million dollar project then how many of the no voters in the Central district would turn their votes around?
Then there is the year round schools. I am sure this would be an inconvenience to the maintenance staff and to the teachers. However it would extend the life of our school buildings and in some cases it would a convenience for some with day care issues in the summer.
I think the general public has had to make sacrifices in their own jobs and they have had to adjust. Is it too much to ask that the district employees that these voters and taxpayers pay, help find our funding solutions instead of the current feet set in concrete attitude and finding fault with every suggestion and new idea?
By Seeing the Light
|
