...Continued from yesterday
While the sub-committee of the sub-committee of the Plan for Excellence committee was busy looking into district configurations, the rabble-rousers were looking into school district business as well. And eureka! A discovery was made. The problem wasn’t the evil troll misappropriating district funds. It was the holiest of all objects in the districts possession. Silver Lake Elementary. It seems that the school district I trust my children to, lied to me. Actually they lied to all of Cuyahoga Falls. To justify building closures, the district presented a cost benefit type report to the people. In fact to a packed auditorium. They showed us building enrollment numbers. You can’t argue with cold, hard numbers.
Problem is, when the school district reported those same enrollment numbers to the state of Ohio for funding purposes, they weren’t the same numbers. Want to guess where the anomalies were? Save your breath, I’ll tell you. Newberry, Sill, and Silver Lake. I am going forward from here assuming that the enrollment numbers reported to the state are the accurate enrollment numbers. That means that the community presentation was not accurate. I had to ask myself why the school district would lead Cuyahoga Falls to believe that Newberry had fewer students than it actually did and Silver Lake had more.
So the rabble-rousers dug deeper. Administrators said the extra money spent at Silver Lake was because salaries were so much higher there. The rabble-rousers had two arguments for this response. Number one that would mean it had most if not all highly qualified experienced teachers. Not true and shame on them if it were. Number two- according to the Ohio Department of Education the real reason for spending disparities most years was in supplies and materials. You know-stuff. Not salaries, not benefits, not maintenance. Stuff. But they will tell you that any of the cool stuff in that building, is courtesy of the PTO. No I did not have a typo. I said PTO. You see if they were a part of the PTA, like the rest of Cuyahoga Falls City Schools, they would have to share stuff.
Anyway, the Ohio Department of Education numbers don’t lie. Money was being spent on supplies and materials. They are also high cost in the purchased services department. For all normal people out there, think utilities. For some reason government cannot call things what they actually are. All accountants, please shut up. You are a very small portion of the population.
Rabble-rousers started getting a little public about this apparent protection that was going on. The school district wasn’t making decisions with responsible financial impact. It was implementing “recovery plans” and “curtailment plans” and proposing levies. It was closing schools in Cuyahoga Falls and telling me my kids were resilient and could handle a change fine. They don’t even know my kids.
OK Sherman, one more time in the Wayback Machine, except this time we’re only going back to February 20, 2007.
The sub-committee of the sub-committee of the Plan for Excellence committee has come to a board meeting to make their recommendations. Drum roll please....
“Reaffirm and celebrate the district’s commitment to its neighborhood schools in the existing configuration ofK-5, 6-8, and 9-12.”
Wow. What a let down. Two years of work so we can do nothing. Typical. Just like the bus committee. Oh, you didn’t know we had a bus committee? That’s because they did nothing either. See that’s how we work in this district.
Run out of money, get the community riled, form a committee, have committee decide that nothing should change, ask for a levy.
Repeat cycle for 40 years. BTW- Got the levy renewal schedule from the treasurer today. Good timing.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Déjà vu
It looks as if the district boundary lines will stay the same. For now. Everyone seems to be happy about it.
What is that old saying? Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it?
We have been down this path before. We have a problem, form a committee, and do nothing.
The bus committee touted the other night is a perfect example. Last year the board president put together a committee to study bussing. They pulled employees from their regular duties for hours on end to study and supposedly revamp district bussing. Make it more efficient, you know. In the end, they did nothing.
But we have also traveled this same redistricting road too. So today, I dug through the garage and found the Wayback Machine. Mr. Peabody is on his way over.
To understand what is going on, you need to understand the dynamics of the Cuyahoga Falls City School District. We used to be teeming with children. The neighborhood school I attended was K-6 with 4 classrooms per grade. That same school today is K-5, 3 classrooms per grade and encompasses 2 additional school building districts. That’s a huge decrease in enrollment over 25 years.
Ah, Mr. Peabody has arrived. Let’s go. We’ll set the dials for 1982.
I was mere babe. I heard some talk of lower enrollment than in years past and the next thing you knew, three Cuyahoga Falls schools were closed. My dad said kids were consolidated. I felt like a product. Little did I know it then, but I was. And just like in private industry, the cost of the product had to be kept down. But for different reasons. Dad said the same thing was happening at GM. They might close his plant and consolidate too. Times were gettin’ tough.
Shortly after this, Stow faced a similar crisis. But they had some forward thinking people on their school board. They knew that this declining enrollment thing wasn’t a fad. It was a steady measurable thing. So they tore down buildings, built some new buildings, and reconfigured their entire district. They set up grade leveled buildings. They rightly assumed that as enrollment fluctuated across the city, it could be easily adjusted for by adding or eliminating classrooms per grade level. Since then Stow has seen a boom in new housing. But I haven’t seen any major school realignments in Stow.
In fact if you notice the two districts that seem to be constantly moving students, realigning boundaries and closing buildings are two of the three that are still in neighbor school configurations in Summit County. Akron and Cuyahoga Falls. Barberton is the other. The rest of Summit County school districts are grade level configured, or a close hybrid. Coincidently, they are also the three out of five districts in Summit County that are in the “needs improvement” status academically.
4 years ago we were told that there was a financial crisis. The students of Newberry and Sill paid the price. There are some that will tell you that everyone paid a price, but I’m here to tell you that no one suffered like the kids that went to these schools did. It was a smack in the face to everyone that paid taxes in this neighborhood; I mean once again we were being asked to close our school. But the emotional toll on the kids’ that were fed the “love your school” propaganda for years was immeasurable. These were their schools, their teachers, their principal.
That’s why I find this quote in today’s Akron Beacon Journal so insulting. “Board Vice President Therese Dunphy acknowledged that Falls residents have an affection for their neighborhood schools. ''There's a sense of community with the building they're in,'' she said.” Really? This from a woman that has had 3 years to offer a solution to the spending and class size disparities and has offered nothing but lip service.
9 months ago the administration indicated a need to make cuts and make drastic changes due to the possible mandate of all day kindergarten. They asked the board to decide what was important, what should be looked at to cut, to save, basically what were our priorities and focus. I offered my idea. No one else did.
Then they asked the same of the community a month later. 5 forums were held and suggestions were offered. The administration took what they had to work with and presented the findings. Now the board, that sat back and did nothing, wants to do something. They don’t like what was offered from the people they pay to do this work. Now they want to form a committee. I’m disgusted.
Why? Because we just had this proposed redistricting committee.
Get back in the Wayback Machine, Sherman. Set the dial for 2004. Remember the 2nd set of building closings I mentioned above? Well it started here in 2004. We are all tip toeing through the daisies until one day we are told an evil troll has destroyed our finances. It is dire. Much will have to be sacrificed to the Holy document known as “The Five-Year Forecast”. And of course, the district will form a committee. It shall be called- “The Plan for Excellence Committee”. Of course there are always those that can’t conform to the status quo. They are commonly called rabble-rousers by administrators. The rabble-rousers formed their own committee and did some home work.
This is getting long, so I’ll leave you with this ‘til tomorrow. While the rabble-rousers were toiling over our cauldrons, the school district was busy forming committees, sub-committees and focus groups. All of which I’ve come to despise but I accept them as it is all these people know. One of the sub-committees formed was the reconfiguration committee. Oddly enough it was co-chaired by two Silver Lake residents. The rabble-rousers raised a fuss and the district reluctantly allowed one Cuyahoga Falls resident to join. I couldn’t wait to see what he outcome of redistricting would be....
Tomorrow... The Recommendations from the Reconfiguration Committee.
What is that old saying? Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it?
We have been down this path before. We have a problem, form a committee, and do nothing.
The bus committee touted the other night is a perfect example. Last year the board president put together a committee to study bussing. They pulled employees from their regular duties for hours on end to study and supposedly revamp district bussing. Make it more efficient, you know. In the end, they did nothing.
But we have also traveled this same redistricting road too. So today, I dug through the garage and found the Wayback Machine. Mr. Peabody is on his way over.
To understand what is going on, you need to understand the dynamics of the Cuyahoga Falls City School District. We used to be teeming with children. The neighborhood school I attended was K-6 with 4 classrooms per grade. That same school today is K-5, 3 classrooms per grade and encompasses 2 additional school building districts. That’s a huge decrease in enrollment over 25 years.
Ah, Mr. Peabody has arrived. Let’s go. We’ll set the dials for 1982.
I was mere babe. I heard some talk of lower enrollment than in years past and the next thing you knew, three Cuyahoga Falls schools were closed. My dad said kids were consolidated. I felt like a product. Little did I know it then, but I was. And just like in private industry, the cost of the product had to be kept down. But for different reasons. Dad said the same thing was happening at GM. They might close his plant and consolidate too. Times were gettin’ tough.
Shortly after this, Stow faced a similar crisis. But they had some forward thinking people on their school board. They knew that this declining enrollment thing wasn’t a fad. It was a steady measurable thing. So they tore down buildings, built some new buildings, and reconfigured their entire district. They set up grade leveled buildings. They rightly assumed that as enrollment fluctuated across the city, it could be easily adjusted for by adding or eliminating classrooms per grade level. Since then Stow has seen a boom in new housing. But I haven’t seen any major school realignments in Stow.
In fact if you notice the two districts that seem to be constantly moving students, realigning boundaries and closing buildings are two of the three that are still in neighbor school configurations in Summit County. Akron and Cuyahoga Falls. Barberton is the other. The rest of Summit County school districts are grade level configured, or a close hybrid. Coincidently, they are also the three out of five districts in Summit County that are in the “needs improvement” status academically.
4 years ago we were told that there was a financial crisis. The students of Newberry and Sill paid the price. There are some that will tell you that everyone paid a price, but I’m here to tell you that no one suffered like the kids that went to these schools did. It was a smack in the face to everyone that paid taxes in this neighborhood; I mean once again we were being asked to close our school. But the emotional toll on the kids’ that were fed the “love your school” propaganda for years was immeasurable. These were their schools, their teachers, their principal.
That’s why I find this quote in today’s Akron Beacon Journal so insulting. “Board Vice President Therese Dunphy acknowledged that Falls residents have an affection for their neighborhood schools. ''There's a sense of community with the building they're in,'' she said.” Really? This from a woman that has had 3 years to offer a solution to the spending and class size disparities and has offered nothing but lip service.
9 months ago the administration indicated a need to make cuts and make drastic changes due to the possible mandate of all day kindergarten. They asked the board to decide what was important, what should be looked at to cut, to save, basically what were our priorities and focus. I offered my idea. No one else did.
Then they asked the same of the community a month later. 5 forums were held and suggestions were offered. The administration took what they had to work with and presented the findings. Now the board, that sat back and did nothing, wants to do something. They don’t like what was offered from the people they pay to do this work. Now they want to form a committee. I’m disgusted.
Why? Because we just had this proposed redistricting committee.
Get back in the Wayback Machine, Sherman. Set the dial for 2004. Remember the 2nd set of building closings I mentioned above? Well it started here in 2004. We are all tip toeing through the daisies until one day we are told an evil troll has destroyed our finances. It is dire. Much will have to be sacrificed to the Holy document known as “The Five-Year Forecast”. And of course, the district will form a committee. It shall be called- “The Plan for Excellence Committee”. Of course there are always those that can’t conform to the status quo. They are commonly called rabble-rousers by administrators. The rabble-rousers formed their own committee and did some home work.
This is getting long, so I’ll leave you with this ‘til tomorrow. While the rabble-rousers were toiling over our cauldrons, the school district was busy forming committees, sub-committees and focus groups. All of which I’ve come to despise but I accept them as it is all these people know. One of the sub-committees formed was the reconfiguration committee. Oddly enough it was co-chaired by two Silver Lake residents. The rabble-rousers raised a fuss and the district reluctantly allowed one Cuyahoga Falls resident to join. I couldn’t wait to see what he outcome of redistricting would be....
Tomorrow... The Recommendations from the Reconfiguration Committee.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Meeting Announced
The treasurer has called for a Special Meeting of the Cuyahoga Falls City School District, Board of Education.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009 at 5:30 PM in the board offices located at 431 Stow St. (To the left of the band doors at the high school). 2nd floor.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009 at 5:30 PM in the board offices located at 431 Stow St. (To the left of the band doors at the high school). 2nd floor.
Surprise! Not.
Don’t you just love surprises? I told you a couple of weeks ago that I heard mumblings of redistricting. But to be honest, since the current district policy had come through the policy review committee with no changes, other than ones I made correcting some minor inconsistencies in the stated, current boundaries, I wasn’t immediately concerned. Then I received the board meeting agenda with attachments last Wednesday.
I’m sure I was as shocked as the people that received letters this Saturday informing them that they may have a new school next year. I almost choked on my cappuccino when I read the letter that was mailed. Listen to the reasons given for this move:
• Overcrowding enrollment at Price and DeWitt Elementary Schools.
• Under enrollment and under utilization of building and staff at Preston and Silver Lake Elementary Schools.
• The need to create a more equitable distribution of class sizes district-wide.
• The need to create available classroom space for the expansion to all day kindergarten in anticipation of the state mandate. All-day kindergarten could begin in the 2010-2011 school year.
Sound familiar? It should because it’s the same points I made in my reconfiguration proposal. Except for the all day K piece. I mean I put all day K in it, but I didn’t know about the state mandate at the time, that was just forward thinking on my part.
I continued to read the letter with the taste of irony on my lips. After all, I’ve been asking for a “comprehensive reconfiguration” since the district closed Newberry and Sill. I remember the promises made. Although many may not remember this one, I do. Three years ago, I was told that the Plan for Excellence committee studied this and decided it wasn’t needed. Two years ago, I was told the same thing. A year ago I was just ignored.
Then about 8 months ago, the board was told that things were lookin’ bad. Real bad. Bad, bad , Leroy Brown bad. We need to pass renewals and get a new levy passed. The members were asked for ideas to save money, retain current programming, and balance the books. I worked for months on my ideas. My friends and family thought I was crazy to care so much. I probably was. But I was brought up to believe that if you’re going to do something, do it right.
I put my presentation on the November agenda. One member was absent and the board president walked out shortly after I started. In other words, interest was low. But I pressed on knowing that it wasn’t necessarily a perfect plan, or an all around likeable plan, but at least it created equity, financial impact, and most importantly- academic benefit. Oh- and don’t forget- all day kindergarten. Yes it affects everyone, yes it’s totally different from the configuration we have now, and OMG yes it utilizes the Newberry building. There, that’s all out of the way.
The inequities in class size, per pupil spending in addition to socioeconomic and academic disparities across our district are shameful. But rather than make some tough lasting decisions, the people of Cuyahoga Falls are once again being asked to sacrifice their children and schools so that certain areas can maintain their status quo. Another knee jerk reaction to appease particular segments of the district. This has nothing to do with all day kindergarten. First of all this is still a State of Ohio pipe dream and second, in the current economy the legislature is going to have a hard time mandating further costs on cash strapped school districts.
So will we have to shift the children of Cuyahoga Falls in 4 or 5 more years as enrollment continues to decline? Or are we willing to make some tough moves now that will be lasting? Make no mistake; these constant, unexpected upheavals of children are detrimental to performance scores, community support and participation, and most importantly a child’s psyche.
I wanted to have a public forum on this issue. Ohio Revised Code says that either the Treasurer, the board president, or two board members may call a special meeting of the board. I tried today to get another member to agree with me to call a special meeting of the board. They were not interested. They wanted to meet first with the Superintendent and see if they could get him to make some changes to the boundary changes. Hmmmm... Looks like some other neighborhoods better watch out. And why are they presenting ideas now? Wasn’t this supposed to be done months ago?
Apparently they want input, and I assume if they get their way, yours will be unimportant. I will try again tomorrow to convince another member to call a special meeting. Hopefully someone will come to their senses. The lack of providing a venue for public participation is appalling.
Oh and remember the needing renewal and new levy part? No worries. I was told that someone looked into this and the affected neighborhoods generally vote no on levies anyway. Whew! We wouldn’t want to mess with neighborhoods that have money!
I’m sure I was as shocked as the people that received letters this Saturday informing them that they may have a new school next year. I almost choked on my cappuccino when I read the letter that was mailed. Listen to the reasons given for this move:
• Overcrowding enrollment at Price and DeWitt Elementary Schools.
• Under enrollment and under utilization of building and staff at Preston and Silver Lake Elementary Schools.
• The need to create a more equitable distribution of class sizes district-wide.
• The need to create available classroom space for the expansion to all day kindergarten in anticipation of the state mandate. All-day kindergarten could begin in the 2010-2011 school year.
Sound familiar? It should because it’s the same points I made in my reconfiguration proposal. Except for the all day K piece. I mean I put all day K in it, but I didn’t know about the state mandate at the time, that was just forward thinking on my part.
I continued to read the letter with the taste of irony on my lips. After all, I’ve been asking for a “comprehensive reconfiguration” since the district closed Newberry and Sill. I remember the promises made. Although many may not remember this one, I do. Three years ago, I was told that the Plan for Excellence committee studied this and decided it wasn’t needed. Two years ago, I was told the same thing. A year ago I was just ignored.
Then about 8 months ago, the board was told that things were lookin’ bad. Real bad. Bad, bad , Leroy Brown bad. We need to pass renewals and get a new levy passed. The members were asked for ideas to save money, retain current programming, and balance the books. I worked for months on my ideas. My friends and family thought I was crazy to care so much. I probably was. But I was brought up to believe that if you’re going to do something, do it right.
I put my presentation on the November agenda. One member was absent and the board president walked out shortly after I started. In other words, interest was low. But I pressed on knowing that it wasn’t necessarily a perfect plan, or an all around likeable plan, but at least it created equity, financial impact, and most importantly- academic benefit. Oh- and don’t forget- all day kindergarten. Yes it affects everyone, yes it’s totally different from the configuration we have now, and OMG yes it utilizes the Newberry building. There, that’s all out of the way.
The inequities in class size, per pupil spending in addition to socioeconomic and academic disparities across our district are shameful. But rather than make some tough lasting decisions, the people of Cuyahoga Falls are once again being asked to sacrifice their children and schools so that certain areas can maintain their status quo. Another knee jerk reaction to appease particular segments of the district. This has nothing to do with all day kindergarten. First of all this is still a State of Ohio pipe dream and second, in the current economy the legislature is going to have a hard time mandating further costs on cash strapped school districts.
So will we have to shift the children of Cuyahoga Falls in 4 or 5 more years as enrollment continues to decline? Or are we willing to make some tough moves now that will be lasting? Make no mistake; these constant, unexpected upheavals of children are detrimental to performance scores, community support and participation, and most importantly a child’s psyche.
I wanted to have a public forum on this issue. Ohio Revised Code says that either the Treasurer, the board president, or two board members may call a special meeting of the board. I tried today to get another member to agree with me to call a special meeting of the board. They were not interested. They wanted to meet first with the Superintendent and see if they could get him to make some changes to the boundary changes. Hmmmm... Looks like some other neighborhoods better watch out. And why are they presenting ideas now? Wasn’t this supposed to be done months ago?
Apparently they want input, and I assume if they get their way, yours will be unimportant. I will try again tomorrow to convince another member to call a special meeting. Hopefully someone will come to their senses. The lack of providing a venue for public participation is appalling.
Oh and remember the needing renewal and new levy part? No worries. I was told that someone looked into this and the affected neighborhoods generally vote no on levies anyway. Whew! We wouldn’t want to mess with neighborhoods that have money!
Friday, April 03, 2009
Did Someone Say Transparent(cy)?
Today was a very interesting day.
There was a policy committee meeting today. These are open to the public, if you are ever so desperate for company that you want to join us. The district boundary policy was in the set to review. I mentioned a couple of discrepancies that I had noticed and was informed that the boundaries may change soon so it’s probably no biggie. Yeah, it's because of all day kindergarten. The district needs to make room for the kids and the only possible way in the whole wide world to do it is to redraw the district lines.
And suddenly the splitting up of children at the middle school level concerns people. It seems that Price and Lincoln students divide and some attend Roberts and some attend Bolich. Gee someone should have thought of the bad boundaries and division of schools 4 years ago. It would have saved us a lot of trouble.
I’ll bet you a pack of crackers that the new boundaries involve moving CF students into Silver Lake Elementary. And I’ll put up some cheese for those crackers that it will cost us. I know one thing. There is no way they would do this because the significant cost of the building is embarrassing and it doesn't currently have the enrollment to support itself.
There was a policy committee meeting today. These are open to the public, if you are ever so desperate for company that you want to join us. The district boundary policy was in the set to review. I mentioned a couple of discrepancies that I had noticed and was informed that the boundaries may change soon so it’s probably no biggie. Yeah, it's because of all day kindergarten. The district needs to make room for the kids and the only possible way in the whole wide world to do it is to redraw the district lines.
And suddenly the splitting up of children at the middle school level concerns people. It seems that Price and Lincoln students divide and some attend Roberts and some attend Bolich. Gee someone should have thought of the bad boundaries and division of schools 4 years ago. It would have saved us a lot of trouble.
I’ll bet you a pack of crackers that the new boundaries involve moving CF students into Silver Lake Elementary. And I’ll put up some cheese for those crackers that it will cost us. I know one thing. There is no way they would do this because the significant cost of the building is embarrassing and it doesn't currently have the enrollment to support itself.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Dollars and Sense
Since the Falls News Press is not interested in publishing data, but would rather publish dueling letters, I have taken the liberty to answer through my blog, some letters from the last few weeks’ issues. When you are done reading take a few minutes to watch my very first YouTube video. This is the first of what I hope will become a regular thing. I have been looking for a way to simplify the confusing world of education funding and the mountains of paperwork that go with it. I hope you enjoy it!
From the Falls News Press of March 22, 2009, my comments in red:
Criticizes School Board Member for Exit
I don’t even know where to start with this one. The letter writer is upset that I didn’t excuse myself or ask for a recess to use the restroom. “she could have at least asked for a recess” He should have asked me why I didn’t ask when I returned from the restroom. In the past, I did ask for a recess and it was denied. Then another member spoke up and the board president graciously allowed 5 minutes. Do you really think I’m going to put up with that? Since my requests are ignored or denied, I will leave if necessary. Which has been twice in 3 ½ years.
“She was a big supporter of the survey that the board sent out…But on this night she seemed to care less what we had to say.” The survey and community input are important to me. But the letter writer wasn’t really there to do that. He wanted to insult and criticize me as he had at previous meetings. Can’t say I’m sorry I missed it. The other speaker that night knows that I oppose gas and oil drilling at Newberry/Bolich as much as she does and will oppose it alongside her.
I do not owe him an explanation as to my restroom visits. Nor do I owe one to the board. The last time I checked, I was a big girl now and don’t need a hall pass or permission to go. As for showing respect to him, well that’s a two way street. It’s nice that all of Cuyahoga Falls now knows that I took a potty break.
I also take note that he doesn’t mention at all if he is upset that open enrollment is so costly and that gifted programming is on the chopping block in lieu of open enrollment.
From the Falls News Press of March 15, 2009, my comments in red:
Asks if Silver Lake school is 'untouchable'
“but I'll ask the question: Is Silver Lake Elementary School untouchable and is any question of its future existence dead on arrival based on the current makeup of the School Board?” Yes and yes.
“can we afford any "sacred cows?"” No. “It's understood that students transferring from other districts bring a certain amount of state funding with them. Does that influx of money offset the savings that could possibly be gained in limiting enrollment to residents of the district and scaling back the number of school buildings, with their related expenses?” No. The so called “revenue” gained from inter-district open enrollment is $1,593,373. The cost of these children is $2,538,762. “Is it not inevitable that we will be closing additional school buildings sooner rather than later?” Unfortunately it’s not inevitable. What I think you meant to say is wouldn’t it be prudent to close additional school buildings sooner rather than later. And yes, it would be. “Isn't now the time to make the hard decisions and garner the savings they could generate rather than asking an already reeling electorate to pass additional levies, which is doubtful, or cutting the services offered to our children?” Yes it would be. But that would require cutting loose the sacred cow you mention above.
From the Falls News Press of March 8, 2009, my comments in red:
Disputes School Board member's claims
“Do your homework and learn your lesson before misleading parents and property owners.” Note to self: Forward your homework to letter writer. Apparently she is only checking the homework from Silver Lake. I wonder if she picked up the gold star stickers…
In a Feb. 15 letter, ("Defends reconfiguration proposal," Page 9) the writer (me!) said that 118 children attending Silver Lake Elementary are "from other cities outside our district." I believe that statement is false. Ooops. My bad. I should have said that 118 children attending Silver Lake do not belong in Silver Lake Elementary and cost us bunches of money.
“… and have made the choice to attend this school through intra-district open enrollment. (Thanks Curt Grimes for demonstrating that other Board members do understand enrollment terminology.)” I also have problems deciphering left from right and figuring out what acronyms stand for. You have discovered my flaw. I can’t keep inter-district and intra-district open enrollment terms straight. Luckily I’m really good with math.
“Open enrollment actually brings in significant dollars from a source other than my property tax bill and I appreciate that.” They also cost a significant portion of your tax bill. Open enrollment “revenue” is $1,593,373. But the cost of educating the very same inter district open enrolled children is $2,538,762. Do you appreciate that? Still feel like thanking “the four Board members who I believe are putting all of our children first.”
“I'm fed up of proposals to close Silver Lake, Price and Preston elementary schools. I'm tired of reading letters designed to pit one neighborhood or side of town against another.” “Proposals”? Is there another board member that did his or her homework and made a proposal I’m unaware of? My proposal made efficient use of our space AND retains current academic programming. My proposal brings the district together as one CFCSD. Not the current “my side of town” attitude.
“Two members of its (Silver Lake PTA) executive board are intra-district open enrollment parents who were warmly welcomed to this school as I'm sure all open enrollment families are in other schools.” I never implied that under the current structure, PTA groups were shutting people out. Where does this come from? When almost half of your schools population is comprised of open enrollment, it would stand to reason that your PTA would reflect the same percentages. Is 25% of the “executive board” from Akron? “District parents, whether through PTOs or PTAs, volunteer their time and energy to help support the education of district children.” I realize this as well. The thing is, I don’t want to support them with my tax dollars.
“My thanks to Barb Gunter, Curt Grimes, Dave Rump, and Therese Dunphy -- the four Board members who I believe are putting all of our children first.” They have put your children first. There is no doubt about that. On the other hand, my “neighborhood” school has been put last for over 20 years. Thanks.
“The letter writer”
“Cuyahoga Falls”, River Estates. Where they call Silver Lake Elementary their neighborhood school. The school they’d like to keep regardless of the cost to the taxpayers of Cuyahoga Falls. At least this lady didn’t lie about where she lives.
End of letter comments.
Enjoy spring break. Scrabble is always a blast in the cold spring break weather.
From the Falls News Press of March 22, 2009, my comments in red:
Criticizes School Board Member for Exit
I don’t even know where to start with this one. The letter writer is upset that I didn’t excuse myself or ask for a recess to use the restroom. “she could have at least asked for a recess” He should have asked me why I didn’t ask when I returned from the restroom. In the past, I did ask for a recess and it was denied. Then another member spoke up and the board president graciously allowed 5 minutes. Do you really think I’m going to put up with that? Since my requests are ignored or denied, I will leave if necessary. Which has been twice in 3 ½ years.
“She was a big supporter of the survey that the board sent out…But on this night she seemed to care less what we had to say.” The survey and community input are important to me. But the letter writer wasn’t really there to do that. He wanted to insult and criticize me as he had at previous meetings. Can’t say I’m sorry I missed it. The other speaker that night knows that I oppose gas and oil drilling at Newberry/Bolich as much as she does and will oppose it alongside her.
I do not owe him an explanation as to my restroom visits. Nor do I owe one to the board. The last time I checked, I was a big girl now and don’t need a hall pass or permission to go. As for showing respect to him, well that’s a two way street. It’s nice that all of Cuyahoga Falls now knows that I took a potty break.
I also take note that he doesn’t mention at all if he is upset that open enrollment is so costly and that gifted programming is on the chopping block in lieu of open enrollment.
From the Falls News Press of March 15, 2009, my comments in red:
Asks if Silver Lake school is 'untouchable'
“but I'll ask the question: Is Silver Lake Elementary School untouchable and is any question of its future existence dead on arrival based on the current makeup of the School Board?” Yes and yes.
“can we afford any "sacred cows?"” No. “It's understood that students transferring from other districts bring a certain amount of state funding with them. Does that influx of money offset the savings that could possibly be gained in limiting enrollment to residents of the district and scaling back the number of school buildings, with their related expenses?” No. The so called “revenue” gained from inter-district open enrollment is $1,593,373. The cost of these children is $2,538,762. “Is it not inevitable that we will be closing additional school buildings sooner rather than later?” Unfortunately it’s not inevitable. What I think you meant to say is wouldn’t it be prudent to close additional school buildings sooner rather than later. And yes, it would be. “Isn't now the time to make the hard decisions and garner the savings they could generate rather than asking an already reeling electorate to pass additional levies, which is doubtful, or cutting the services offered to our children?” Yes it would be. But that would require cutting loose the sacred cow you mention above.
From the Falls News Press of March 8, 2009, my comments in red:
Disputes School Board member's claims
“Do your homework and learn your lesson before misleading parents and property owners.” Note to self: Forward your homework to letter writer. Apparently she is only checking the homework from Silver Lake. I wonder if she picked up the gold star stickers…
In a Feb. 15 letter, ("Defends reconfiguration proposal," Page 9) the writer (me!) said that 118 children attending Silver Lake Elementary are "from other cities outside our district." I believe that statement is false. Ooops. My bad. I should have said that 118 children attending Silver Lake do not belong in Silver Lake Elementary and cost us bunches of money.
“… and have made the choice to attend this school through intra-district open enrollment. (Thanks Curt Grimes for demonstrating that other Board members do understand enrollment terminology.)” I also have problems deciphering left from right and figuring out what acronyms stand for. You have discovered my flaw. I can’t keep inter-district and intra-district open enrollment terms straight. Luckily I’m really good with math.
“Open enrollment actually brings in significant dollars from a source other than my property tax bill and I appreciate that.” They also cost a significant portion of your tax bill. Open enrollment “revenue” is $1,593,373. But the cost of educating the very same inter district open enrolled children is $2,538,762. Do you appreciate that? Still feel like thanking “the four Board members who I believe are putting all of our children first.”
“I'm fed up of proposals to close Silver Lake, Price and Preston elementary schools. I'm tired of reading letters designed to pit one neighborhood or side of town against another.” “Proposals”? Is there another board member that did his or her homework and made a proposal I’m unaware of? My proposal made efficient use of our space AND retains current academic programming. My proposal brings the district together as one CFCSD. Not the current “my side of town” attitude.
“Two members of its (Silver Lake PTA) executive board are intra-district open enrollment parents who were warmly welcomed to this school as I'm sure all open enrollment families are in other schools.” I never implied that under the current structure, PTA groups were shutting people out. Where does this come from? When almost half of your schools population is comprised of open enrollment, it would stand to reason that your PTA would reflect the same percentages. Is 25% of the “executive board” from Akron? “District parents, whether through PTOs or PTAs, volunteer their time and energy to help support the education of district children.” I realize this as well. The thing is, I don’t want to support them with my tax dollars.
“My thanks to Barb Gunter, Curt Grimes, Dave Rump, and Therese Dunphy -- the four Board members who I believe are putting all of our children first.” They have put your children first. There is no doubt about that. On the other hand, my “neighborhood” school has been put last for over 20 years. Thanks.
“The letter writer”
“Cuyahoga Falls”, River Estates. Where they call Silver Lake Elementary their neighborhood school. The school they’d like to keep regardless of the cost to the taxpayers of Cuyahoga Falls. At least this lady didn’t lie about where she lives.
End of letter comments.
Enjoy spring break. Scrabble is always a blast in the cold spring break weather.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
The Truth Hurts
I’ve got a message for the Kellie basher of the week. By that I mean the latest letter in the Falls News Press regarding my facts that some would like to remain under the rug. I have done my homework. More so than many of my comrades. While the powers that be continue to tout the money that inter district open enrollment brings in, they conveniently do not talk about what is SPENT on inter district open enrolled children. Ms. Goodrich should ask the board members that she lauds why they apparently don’t realize there is COST involved in educating these kids.
Who is trying to mislead property owners and parents? I am trying to educate them. There are ways to save money, operate efficiently and retain current programming. I want the taxpayers to be armed with knowledge when heading to the polls. I’m not trying to “pit one neighborhood or side of town against the other”.
I will make it as plain as possible.
TOTAL IN FROM OPEN ENROLLMENT: $1,843,415.71
In and used for inter district open enrolled Spec Ed -$250,042.56
Actual amount Inter District Open enrolled children bring in: $1,593,373.15
School, Number of inter district open enrolled pupils, Building cost per pupil cost, Total building cost of inter district students.
TOTAL IN FROM OPEN ENROLLMENT: $1,843,415.71
In and used for inter district open enrolled Spec Ed -$250,042.56
Actual amount Inter District Open enrolled children bring in: $1,593,373.15
School, Number of inter district open enrolled pupils, Building cost per pupil cost, Total building cost of inter district students.
Silver Lake- 53 @ $8741 PP = $463,273
Richardson- 14 @ $7278 PP = $101,892
Price- 32 @ $7228 PP = $231,296
Preston- 20 @ $8760 PP = $175,200
Lincoln- 9 @ $6716 PP = $60,444
Dewitt- 25 @ $7193 PP = $179,825
Roberts- MS 19 @ $8336 PP = $158,384
Bolich MS- 35 @ $9085 PP = $317,975
CFHS- 117 @ $7269 PP = $850,473
Total COST of inter district open enrolled children -$2,538,762.00
Actual in from inter district open enrollment: $1,593,373.15
Local tax dollars SPENT on inter district open enrolled children -$945,388.85
Yes, almost a million dollars of your property tax dollars are spent on children “from other cities outside our district”.
The above only deals with inter district open enrollment. Intra district generally cost the taxpayer as well. For example, a child that should be at Lincoln at a cost of $6716, when open enrolled at Silver Lake costs $8741. $2025 more than at his or her home school. The only time an intra district student saves us money is when they leave Silver Lake or Preston for a lower cost per pupil school. But being that Silver Lake boasts the highest inter and intra district open enrollment numbers, just like the above example the 50 intra district open enrollees COST the taxpayer quite a bit due to the abundance in a high COST building.
You may wonder about the special education deduction. $250,042.56 of the inter district money the state provides is for special education services. Services that the same inter district special education children are using and we are paying for. They actually use more than they bring in special ed, but in this case we’ll call it a wash. So just to clarify- the state pays the district this amount because the children use this amount. It is NOT revenue.
Keep in mind that the above inter district open enrolled children brought in $5614.42 each; with some funding adjustments for the special education. Same deal as special ed, sort of. The state pays the district this amount because they use this amount. But… as you see above they use more than this amount. In most cases an inter district open enrolled child brings in far less than it COSTS to educate them in any of our schools.
Richardson- 14 @ $7278 PP = $101,892
Price- 32 @ $7228 PP = $231,296
Preston- 20 @ $8760 PP = $175,200
Lincoln- 9 @ $6716 PP = $60,444
Dewitt- 25 @ $7193 PP = $179,825
Roberts- MS 19 @ $8336 PP = $158,384
Bolich MS- 35 @ $9085 PP = $317,975
CFHS- 117 @ $7269 PP = $850,473
Total COST of inter district open enrolled children -$2,538,762.00
Actual in from inter district open enrollment: $1,593,373.15
Local tax dollars SPENT on inter district open enrolled children -$945,388.85
Yes, almost a million dollars of your property tax dollars are spent on children “from other cities outside our district”.
The above only deals with inter district open enrollment. Intra district generally cost the taxpayer as well. For example, a child that should be at Lincoln at a cost of $6716, when open enrolled at Silver Lake costs $8741. $2025 more than at his or her home school. The only time an intra district student saves us money is when they leave Silver Lake or Preston for a lower cost per pupil school. But being that Silver Lake boasts the highest inter and intra district open enrollment numbers, just like the above example the 50 intra district open enrollees COST the taxpayer quite a bit due to the abundance in a high COST building.
You may wonder about the special education deduction. $250,042.56 of the inter district money the state provides is for special education services. Services that the same inter district special education children are using and we are paying for. They actually use more than they bring in special ed, but in this case we’ll call it a wash. So just to clarify- the state pays the district this amount because the children use this amount. It is NOT revenue.
Keep in mind that the above inter district open enrolled children brought in $5614.42 each; with some funding adjustments for the special education. Same deal as special ed, sort of. The state pays the district this amount because they use this amount. But… as you see above they use more than this amount. In most cases an inter district open enrolled child brings in far less than it COSTS to educate them in any of our schools.
Who is trying to mislead property owners and parents? I am trying to educate them. There are ways to save money, operate efficiently and retain current programming. I want the taxpayers to be armed with knowledge when heading to the polls. I’m not trying to “pit one neighborhood or side of town against the other”. I’m trying to show people how our money is SPENT.
Lastly, I’ve emphasized COST and SPENT because I felt they sorely needed pointed out. So I wonder if I have convinced the letter writer that I have indeed done my homework. I've done it so well that I'm hoping I get a gold star.
Monday, February 23, 2009
En Garde
Interesting letter in the Falls News this week. I guess the attempts to deceive the public will never cease. What he forgot to tell you is that while some open enrollment at Silver Lake are Cuyahoga Falls children, they still cost more to educate in Silver Lake than at their home school. To make it simple for those of you that are confused- if you belong at Lincoln you would cost us $3000 less to educate you than it does at Silver Lake. No matter how you try to shake it down, 47% of Silver Lake elementary is open enrolled and it costs the people of Cuyahoga Falls more than it needs to. Way more.
He also forgot to tell you that the morning kindergarten is just as small as the afternoon kindergarten, and please take note that he left Dewitt out of the stats. He also failed to mention that while he was throwing out averages, there are many CF classrooms at 26-28 students and there none close to that large at Silver Lake. The biggy is this- if we would stop accepting open enrollment Silver Lake elementary would have one classroom in grades K-5. And still have the low average class size. That’s 5.5 extra teachers and one expensive building they want us to support.
Why am I making such a big deal about it? Because we are now faced with making cuts and facing levy threats again. When I look at our priorities, I am appalled. I am looking at this letter two days after paying my property taxes to the county and I have to say to myself, am I getting my moneys worth?
I guess the letter writer would have the people of Cuyahoga Falls support the curtailment plan which calls for gifted programming, auto technology, industrial arts, and foreign language cuts, reduce text book purchases, cutting teachers, and eliminating after school activities and field trips, so that the district can afford to keep his neighborhood school open.
I am still waiting for clarification on why my proposal is expensive and unrealistic. I will say this again- A majority of Summit County districts educate children in the same manner as I propose. They do it efficiently and effectively, and they score better on Ohio standards tests. Only Akron, Barberton and Cuyahoga Falls cling to the neighborhood schools concept which is proving to be a dinosaur in the world of education. It has put buildings in each of these districts at risk of parent choice programs. What that means is that if a particular building in a district performs poorly 3 years in a row, the school district must offer the child their choice of a school within a district at district expense. If the poor performance continues the child qualifies for a voucher to attend the private school of his/her choice. This IS where we’re heading ladies and gentlemen.
The district can set goals and form 15 more committees but they will not begin to make progress for this district as a whole until they face the real problem. The academic, socio/economic, and class size disparities will not go away on their own. We cannot achieve the “Excellent” rating doing it like we’ve done since the 1800’s.
He also forgot to tell you that the morning kindergarten is just as small as the afternoon kindergarten, and please take note that he left Dewitt out of the stats. He also failed to mention that while he was throwing out averages, there are many CF classrooms at 26-28 students and there none close to that large at Silver Lake. The biggy is this- if we would stop accepting open enrollment Silver Lake elementary would have one classroom in grades K-5. And still have the low average class size. That’s 5.5 extra teachers and one expensive building they want us to support.
Why am I making such a big deal about it? Because we are now faced with making cuts and facing levy threats again. When I look at our priorities, I am appalled. I am looking at this letter two days after paying my property taxes to the county and I have to say to myself, am I getting my moneys worth?
I guess the letter writer would have the people of Cuyahoga Falls support the curtailment plan which calls for gifted programming, auto technology, industrial arts, and foreign language cuts, reduce text book purchases, cutting teachers, and eliminating after school activities and field trips, so that the district can afford to keep his neighborhood school open.
I am still waiting for clarification on why my proposal is expensive and unrealistic. I will say this again- A majority of Summit County districts educate children in the same manner as I propose. They do it efficiently and effectively, and they score better on Ohio standards tests. Only Akron, Barberton and Cuyahoga Falls cling to the neighborhood schools concept which is proving to be a dinosaur in the world of education. It has put buildings in each of these districts at risk of parent choice programs. What that means is that if a particular building in a district performs poorly 3 years in a row, the school district must offer the child their choice of a school within a district at district expense. If the poor performance continues the child qualifies for a voucher to attend the private school of his/her choice. This IS where we’re heading ladies and gentlemen.
The district can set goals and form 15 more committees but they will not begin to make progress for this district as a whole until they face the real problem. The academic, socio/economic, and class size disparities will not go away on their own. We cannot achieve the “Excellent” rating doing it like we’ve done since the 1800’s.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
