Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Still More Questions (continued)

That's what's been done about the situation. But this is where we are. The question is, what more should we, as voters, tell the school board to do?

So here are my questions:

1. Where do you see inequalities between the facilities of the two high schools? Are the inequalities confined to the outdoor athletic facilities? Or do you also see inequities in the performing arts centers, the band and music facilities, the lunchrooms, the classroom facilities, the faculties, etc.? It's important to be specific about the problem.

2. Would you support a $5 million bond levy to build a new football stadium, with an eight-track, at PHS Central?

3. Are the demographics of the northern and southern halves of the PLSD really so different that northern secession is warranted?

4. Or, alternatively, should we try to find ways to mend the apparent breach between north and south? If so, what should we do? For example, would combining the city and the township into a single unit of government help in this regard? How about building a community center, complete with swimming pool, that this entire community could share (funded, pro rata, by the city and the township)?

5. How about my suggestion that PHS Central and PHS North increase sharing of their facilities? Should, for example, all varsity football games at PHS North?

6. Have you any other suggestions?

equal

I think any mouse is displaying the elitist attitude that has created much of the problem in this district for years. She and her kids have the nice new school and she then looks down her nose at the rest of the district for being luke warm to passing more levies that only favors her elitist family. The operating levy that she is referring too where the outlying areas and Columbus voted for the levy while the city and the southern precincts voted against the levy was almost down the boundaries of the North and Central High School districts. What she should be concerned with is the most recent levy where only two precincts out of the 35 voted in favor of the levy.

One argument that I heard of why the Board refuse to build a stadium at the Central High School site was it only affected a few and it wasn?’t worth the expense. What this discussion has shown and I what I had over looked was that the High School has more than football teams playing on these fields and in these stadiums. When you add the two soccer teams, the two football teams, the two track teams, and then the band contests the number of students it serves becomes a much larger issue.

The second argument is that players and athletics do just as well on a track or a football field because times and other ways to evaluate these students are all the same. What is important to understand here is that competition plays a huge role in the determination of athletic or other kinds of scholarships. I believe if you play football for a division five school your chances of getting a full ride at OSU are not nearly as good as one that excels in a division one school. Do you run faster on a track at a division five school or a division one school? Although many of the records recorded every year seem to point out that the larger schools with more athletics do perform with faster and have better scores in track. Then having a competitive track invitational is important. The same goes for the North Girls basketball team that invites schools from all over the nation to play in their tournament.

I think the Central voters would welcome a split from the debt and the if you folks that think that is a solution then go for it. Remember you folks in the northern district mostly township will have over 2/3s of the students. Since the city is always against your plans they will make up around one third of the district. The $77 Million debt for the North HS will then become your debt entirely. Then when we factor in the Harmon, Tussing, Violet and Fairfield ES good luck all of these schools in your district and all the responsibility would be yours. I would expect a 30 percent or more increase in your property taxes.


I think what Mr. Rigelman is trying to do here is to find a consensus of voters that will represent 50% plus one. Sometimes in a democracy we must listen to all that vote not just the zealots that think they have more rights than their poorer neighbors.

Covering your bases

The issue here is how do we get a bond levy passed and also how do we settle the differences between the two High Schools districts?

I believe separating the two schools areas into different school districts would be a disaster for both sides.

Somehow those in the Northern district must understand the struggle for central parents supporting a district with their tax dollars where that majority of those funds go to benefiting others. Just as clear there needs to be some atonement by the board to at least acknowledge that mistakes that were made in 2000 in building the Taj Mahal and here is the plan to fix it. In addition I think there needs to be some creative ways of funding these projects. Currently every suggestion every comment is met with ?“we can?’t do that because.?” The board has only one solution and it is a take it or leave it solution while ignoring the voters that must have the final say.

To pass a bond levy the board must find at least 1000 voters in the district and turn them around.

I think sharing the facilities with North would also be a disaster because of the recent history of Central Coaches requesting time and being denied on a regular basis by the North Coaches. Just like getting the crumbs in 2000 to expect interest to make the two schools equal this would just prolong that feeling.

I also think the current school board is not showing any real leadership in this issue and they all have their little groups to protect. That will be for a later discussion.

Will I consider voting for a bond issue if it included a stadium for Central? However like broke, I have lost two jobs in the last ten years. The over all need is to control our need for more taxes. Clearly if we say cut the elementary school requests down to one school and build a stadium for half the currently requested milage and that levy would go in 2006 then I might feel inclined to vote for it.

As many know each year when the assessments are made by the county the dollar amounts for the full district stays the same. That means if we as a district have experienced an increase in property valuation then each of our individual taxes bills tend to decrease. If we can delay and make smaller the requests for the schools then we can flatten out those increases to make it livable for all. I think there are a number of issues working their way through City Council that will slow our growth in coming years. We need to buy some time.

I think one advantage that the Central HS has is that it is in the city. It could benefit from some shared facilities with the city if their was that kind of out of the box thinking going on here.

As for the Community Recreation Center I think that will take more milage than the current 2.5 mills requested by the school district.


By Father of many

Mixed message

You state that you would consider voting for one elementary school and a new football stadium, as opposed to two elementaries?

I think someone has their priorities in a bind. We need the schools. Could they be built for less than proposed? Probably, but I can't believe you would want to waste money for a brand new stadium and track since the current one has just been upgraded. And you think the school board has things screwed up? Yours might be the only vote for such a proposal!

By Anon