Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

The Facilities Committee Report can be viewed on the PLSD's website, they also have posted some FAQ's which will be expanded upon in the coming weeks.

http://www.pickerington.k12.oh.us/

If there are questions you have you'd like to see addressed the District Office can be contacted at 833-2110.



By Here you go.......

Let's get real here folks

I want to first thank the web master for getting this important report posted on your web site. The last time I looked the district had not posted it on the PLSD web site.

What makes this report so important in the narrow minded approach that was used in the study and the research for this report. Yea!! we have all heard the excuses and the reasons why they took this narrow approach.

What jumped out at me was the power and influence the teachers and the staff have over these recommendations. I believe most of this narrow mindness is coming from that quarter of the process. Clearly our teachers are not about to consider any options that may inconvenience them and save the taxpayers money.

Just as clear is the union mentality that now permeates within this group of (supposedly) professional people. This report is all about them not the taxpayers. They want it all at the expense of our entire community. This same union opposed that February levy and bond issue because they were in a snit about not getting a huge pay raise. Now they are in on the ''talks'' and they resort right back to the same old crap of the ''Taj Mahal'' mentality.

First the report is FULL of mis-information. Yes DeJong has been contracted with the state to provide school district growth figures. Yes they will play a big roll in the determination of future funding. However their figures are now under scrutiny by the state because they have padded their numbers over the years and for our district's own protection we need to do our own study now and not depend on an outside contractor. At the same time I understand from a school district point of view they must plan on the worse case. However with that said they need break points along the way if their predictions don't turn out to be realistic.

The second issue is that we need to somehow get the horse around in front to be pulling the wagon instead of the current system where the employees are telling the management what they will tolerate from the taxpayers.

I think we need to find some board members with a little spinal fluid left that can actually study these so-called emergency situations like extended school hours, split sessions and year round school.

I had to laugh when they say they teach in teams and they must leave the the grade configuration the way it is because this is simply not they way they do things here in Pickerington. Now if you are going to try to claim that you are using a state approved firm (DeJong) for growth figures and then turn around and do a shift of approved grade configurations of the state that causes you to be forced into higher square footage per student is beyond me.


Until the members of the school board and this school administration get real I will continue to vote NO!!




By Still Voting NO!

A dip in the road

I having trouble understanding how some of these figures were determined and how they can stand on these projections.


First we are at capacity in our elementary schools. Our current capacity is around 3080 and our current enrollment is around 3440. That is no problem.

Then the graph for the elementary schools goes on to say that from the year 2009 to 2010 there is a flat growth rate and the enrollment stays right at around 3880. Then in 2011 it picks up right where it left off and regains all of that growth it lost the previous year.

They do acknowledge that DeJong looked at birth rates. I can understand if the birth rate in 2003 was low then that would explain a dip in the elementary enrollment for the year 2010. Since none of us know the birth rate for this year or next and if that is driving this chart then how do they know if the birth rate will increase in 2005?

Are they looking at birth rates just in Pickerington or all over Central Ohio?

What are they using for housing starts rates? Clearly there is a very huge difference between MORPC and the US Census data.

If they are seeing a downturn in new babies in the area now then what happens if that downward trend continues? Does the district get stuck building a new high school that we see sit empty?

important question

One thing that strikes me is that the committee feels it it OK to build millions of dollars of gymnasiums so that the space to eat lunch does not limit the use of the gym for important instruction. The reason it strikes me is that why don't they have the kids eat in the classrooms to free up the gymnasium for its intended purpose? Durning most of the winter months many of the children return to their classrooms for recess inside because of weather conditions, monitoring arrangements are in place to supervise the children during this period of time. Why can't we extend this to lunch?

Sure it is inconvienent to walk to class from the cafeteria serving line, and of course accidents may happen when trays are dropped but these will be few as I know from experience. When I attended public elelmentary school our building was nearly 100 years old. Our serving cafeteria was in the basement of a four story building with no elevetor. We all picked up our trays downstairs and climbed five stories of stairs to eat our lunch in our classrooms as we had not cafetia space or room with tables to eat in. Our gym was used for gym and music. Sure a few kids including me dropped our trays, usually on the last flight of steps... but this was no problem, we cleaned up after ourselves with help from friends and teachers and got a new tray. This of course cost the district more money to provide that extra lunch,as they did not charge us again, but I do believe it was not in the millions of dollars as constructing gyms may be!

Our schools in the PLSD are most all one floor on the elemntary level, except Heritage. It would seem to me that logistics and convenience of eating lunch in a cafeteria could be sacrificed in order to devote taxpayer resources to more pressing needs. Let them eat lunch in the classrooms to free up your isntruction space. Use the resources to provide classrooms that are needed.