|
|
Try this
OK, look at things from this perspective. What has not changed in either the administration of the schools or the board since these levies started failing and all the threats and crap started? Look for a common thread. When you find it, pull on it to see what unravels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What do you want ?
OK - is what you're saying is that you want the BOE to tell you they can house 375 - 500 new kids each year (only some of those should be K-4) with no new buildings since the early 90's & not run out of room? And that it doesn't cost anything to educate them?
Wouldn't we be slamming them then for being unrealistic, not informing the public of a housing crisis? When was the last time you guys visited an elementary school? It's not a secret that they are busting at the seams - they've got kids stuffed everywhere. You want to see programs deteriorate - try having gym in the classroom for 26 kids. I've heard that the art rooms are being used in some schools as a classroom & ''art is on a cart'' - so that program won't be the same.
With split sessions they get at least 1 hour less of instruction a day so that's 180 hours less a year or about one month less of instructional time over the course of the school year.
I know maybe the BOE could beg the City Council & Violet Township to quit issuing occupancy permits or building permits - whatever they are called. I don't think the BOE has anything to do with this nor do I think whether the schools have room or not is a consideration for the entities that build the homes - did I miss something here? There are tons of neighborhoods started all over Pickerington - it's a shame that can't be stopped when the school system can't absorb anymore. Or at least be timed so they could keep up.
If there are some ideas as to how to house these kids lets hear them. Papers said the BOE was looking at other configurations to ''store'' our kids too - maybe a better solution should be put on the table. It could be a great platform to run for office with.
This BOE did change the bus company and the architect we are using - isn't that a step in the direction we want them to go?
By PLSD parent
|
|
|
Building permits
Something to keep in mind here. New building permit sales is down 70% in the township and nearly the same in the city according to the papers. The ''growth'' is residual from old development policies in both areas. I firmly believe that the numbers that the schools are PROJECTING are in error. Growth in student population reacts years out from changes like the building permits going down. I believe the schools are using some sort of ''national norm'' when projecting growth in the out years rather than actual local data. The new leaders in the community will keep this growth low and manageable. That was their pledge and that is what they are delivering. Maybe if the schools actually met with the city, violet township, liberty township, canal winchester and most importantly the city of Columbus, they would have a clearer picture on what the growth will ACTUALLY be and then plan accordingly. That is my beef with the Board is that they work in a vacuum. They do not attend trustee or council meetings. There is no communication to see what is on the horizon for growth.
There has to be a realistic medium between what the schools have projected, what they currently have to house and what the local governments are projecting or planning for. I actually was made to believe that the new members of the board and some of the old ones had open lines of communication with the local governments and that all this would be a joint effort to communicate and solve problems. Silly me for believing that.
By Council Watcher
|
|
|
Get your act together
As I listen to folks on this web site and in person there appears to be an array of reasons for both confusion and mis-trust on what is coming out of the Board of Education.
I think before we can move forward and start making any decisions as a community we need to have a clear message and that message needs to make sense.
I believe everyone in the community can see that we have portables all around most of our elementary schools. Clearly there appears to be a need for permanent housing of these students.
About a year ago there was a spat within our educational services (Board, Teachers Union, The Press,and the Public) about a work session that the board told the press that there would be no vote taken and there was a vote taken. Clearly the Board SCREWED up and they refused to admit to their mistake. This was with the full advice and consent of the PLSD Superintendent.
Despite the screw up there was a plan presented to the public that to me anyway appeared reasonable in that it only built one new elementary school and added onto Violet and Pickerington Elementary schools.
Well that plan may have had a chance if the ENTIRE school board would have got behind it and presented it to the public. However in their haste to get this issue to the ballot they apparently slighted not only the Teachers Union but Board Member Jim Brink. So since the Teachers Union supported Jim during his election in 2003, he opposed the issue along with the union because of I forgot the reason. Now we are proposing a new plan to build two new schools and the details are non specific so far.
The current plan up for voter approval I believe is loosely based on a facilities report that currently has NOT been adopted by the Board. So how can you make decisions on a bond issue and you haven't adopted a plan for future growth and facilities?
Then there is the Committee that reviewed the staff recommendations for future building needs and they based all of their information on a state consultant that made future growth projections and as far as I know they did not included any input from the City or Township.
Then when you read their preliminary report they state they are ''proud of their backgrounds'' and ''We do not question the expertise of the PLSD Consultants.''
Folks we need to talk.
Clearly our board wants to keep their collective heads buried into a report or two and not look up at the public. They are losing these levy campaigns by huge margins. I think there are issues of trust, issues of hope for the future and how do we control growth, there are issues with taxpayer's ability to pay more.
Until the board can come get together on their message and come up with a acceptable plan then I believe we are in for a long hard ride down the side of a slippery slope of declining academic performance from this system.
|
