Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Different Directions

Since our High Schools are the high dollar items why do we continue to build High Schools with four grade levels? Many districts have just Sophomore through Seniors in their High Schools.

When the district was trying to sell us all on the Taj Mahal they clamed that each school would have the capacity for 1800 students each. That means our district could currently support and provide class rooms for 3600 10th through 12th grad students.

If we expanded the two Junior High Schools to have the capacity of say 1,800 each then we save on new high school staff and a huge building with a third set of athletic facilities. Say in NINE years they actually build a new track and athletic field at Central and expand the facilities at Ridgeview and Lakeview. Another wing at Lakeview at two stories is not a problem and I won't accept that BS that Yocum put out the last time. A two story addition at Ridgeview could be a little tight but they will already have their track and bleachers. Don't tell me that the State Champion Girls basketball team that won out of the Ridgeview Gym will no longer be adequate.

That means without building any new High schools our district could growth to around 15,600 students. Even at a 5% rate of growth each year for the next TEN years we would still have the capacity to house All of our students.

If we could reduce the school's rate of growth down to 2% per year then we would not need that third High School until 2030 or 25 years out. Now spread $180,000,000 over ten years versus 25 years.

If the schools would start to approach their problems in this light I think they could sell their school levies.

By The bumb on our head is bigger

Facilities Review Committee

The report of the Facilities Review Committee is available to the public. This committee used enrollment data from a professional study, that employed various methods of predicting enrollment. Historical data was not the basis of our enrollment figures. This DeJong study is also available to the public. If actual enrollment differs from the projected, either up or down, then the building needs for the district will be different. As for building new schools vs. additions, it's obvious, from the November election, that the teachers union didn't support additions. I believe the concern was that the schools would get too large (referring to elementary and middle schools) and common space (cafeteria, gym, media center, bathrooms, etc.) as well as staff (principal, counselors, tutors, nurses, etc.) would be stretched too thin. We had a great number of teachers and administrators on the committee and the idea of additions was overwhelmingly rejected. So, the task of the committee was to identify housing needs for the current and future population of students in the district. An ''ideal'' school size was determined for each grade level (i.e., elem, middle, Jr. & Sr. highs) and then enrollment projections were used to determine when new buildings would be required. We did not identify specifics of building design or materials or define athletic/extracurricular facilities. The school board ultimately specifies these. We also specified a timeline for these buildings to come on line. However, the voters ultimately control this time line. I'm confident that our current City Council will continue to manage growth in the city. Hopefully, the enrollment projections (which are periodically updated) will show fewer students and therefore fewer buildings required. Right now, our elementaries are in a crisis and the students have to be housed somewhere. That's why 2 new elementaries have been on the ballot twice and most likely, will continue to be until approved by the voters.

As far as renovations go, the term is misleading. It covers maintenance and repair, not just new carpeting and paint. Under the OSFC (Ohio Schools Facilities Commission) program, we must maintain our schools on a certain defined schedule (e.g., replace roof after a certain number of years) and renovate to meet current requirements (e.g., alarm systems). It makes good sense not to let buildings go to pot by insuring wiring is up to date, windows & doors are replaced to be more energy efficient, and fire alarms are up to date, to name a few items.

If you want more information, please ask for it. Read the whole report and the referenced reports. It should be available from the district office, and hopefully on the district website in time.

I are smart and I won't pay more

The below quote is somewhat insulating to me and every one else that votes no on these recent levies. You people can talk all you want about your needs and the needs of our poor little kids but the fact remains I can't afford to vote to give even more of my limited income to the schools. What is even more frustrating these same school administrators are blind to the costs of their stupid requests and they ALL refuse to consider any alternatives to reduces costs to the district taxpayers.

This committee was under total control of the school administration and the committee has simply rubber stamped the fantasies of the Teachers Union. Remember they (teachers union) didn't support the February levy because they were not consulted first.

Now many of them think it is simply a matter of educating us all (maybe I should have used the word indoctrinate).

Maybe the plan to allow the schools to drop a knock is the only way to get through to these folks that seem to have such thick skulls.

''District residents need to be educated, informed and aware of the problems facing the district,'' Meglich said.

Mr. Meglich I could care less about your problems and that of the school system when I must cut back drastically and you don't.


By Blind Taxpayer

BT is Right, But

In all the years that I have been following the PLSD, including the six years that I served on the School Board, I have never seen sufficient concern shown for the interests of the taxpayers of this school district. A year on the board is all it took to turn me completely around on this score. Since we taxpayers also comprise an overwhelming majority of the voters, it is not hard to see why it has been so hard for the PLSD to pass levies. After awhile on the board, I started voting against them myself.

When Mrs. Oakes and I tried, as board members, to right the balance, everyone in the school district could see the result. We were cut off, seated on opposite sides of the board table, ridiculed, threatened and personally attacked. Our children and spouses even suffered retaliation. And our school board colleagues would not even allow us to put the ill-conceived designs for PHS North and Lakeview PJHS to a vote. I have explained elsewhere the origins of the excesses we now see in these two schools.

From initial indications, the report of the most recent PLSD Facilities Committee also does not appear to have given proper weight to taxpayer interests. Renovating Heritage after its thorough renovation just a couple years ago, and renovating two middle schools that were just built a few years ago, are complete nonstarters. As far as I am concerned, they are DOA. If the rest of the report is cut from the same cloth, the entire report may be a nonstarter. I suggest, however, that we reserve final judgement until we all have read the entire report, which I hope the PLSD will have the intelligence to post on its web site in the next few days.

In the meantime, it is imperative that candidates for school board who take taxpayer interests seriously step forward now to run for the board. It is the school board's job to bring administration and faculty ''pie-in-the-sky'' ideas, of which there is an unlimited supply in this school district, down to earth. Unless there are at least three people on the board who share these concerns (as Gail and I have demonstrated, two won't do), however, taxpayer concerns do not stand a chance. As luck would have it, three positions on the board open up this fall.

We need three new leaders. Whoever steps forward to represent taxpayer interests on the school board can certainly count on my support. I'll go door to door for you, as will dozens, if not hundreds, of others. We need to do to the School Board this November what we did to the City Council two years ago and will complete this November.

But you need to step forward now and let us know who you are. Party affiliation is irrelevant. All we need is honesty and good common sense.