Levy would restore sports, activities

Holding us hostage didn't work,scare tatics didn't either....lets see some administration cuts and some concessions from the union,get in some new blood,then maybe you'll get a levy passed next year after new contracts with the unions

A very weak response from the biased "Grove City SWCS District Record". If the 2% salary increases were assumptions then the SWCS district lied when they tried to create a needless panic when they predicted an "assumed" $34million deficit by the end of 2012, which included the "assumed" 2% salary increases. What lies are you spinning "Grove City SWCS District Record"?

YAWN...

I would not be opposed to passing this school levy if ...

A) They would cut the Administrative staff. There are too many overpaid Administators in our district.

B) Forget about the pay-to play. The revenue generated by the sports should allow all of the kids to play.

If you allow the quality of your schools to deteriorate, then so will the value of your homes. This decrease in housing prices will cost you much more than any tax increase. Few want to buy a home in a town where the schools are junk.

No win situation - except for early drinkers at WalMart and Parkers. How about the extra revenue generated from the early booze sales pay for the schools? Also, lets lower the drinking age to get more on the bottle. Come on...think it through.

The school board and King Stage should be aware that the angry mob is gathering and half of them will be gone on Tuesday the other half in two years! Yes we may be low life taxpayers but lie to us and bash us over the head and we weill rise up!

Holding our Kids hostage will not work!

Tammy, what do you mean that they have too many overpaid administrators in SWCS? You would be the first to scream that supervision was bad or that the district was mishandling Federal funds or not doing enough to increase learning. This district is HUGE and it takes every administrator to keep things moving along at a reasonable clip. As for self-sufficient sports, the busses for away games and the cost of officials would suck up most of that money.
Let's face it, folks: what a lot of you want is just not possible. I agree that contracts need to be negotiated carefully and that can be done with new board members. But don't tie the new board's hands by not giving them the funds to work with.

The SWCS board should all be voted out. Their concept in a tough economy is one of "we are more important than people feeding their families, keeping their homes, and keeping their cars. Give us money now, who cares how many people get hurt." Every single person and company in this country has had to learn to make do with less, but the SWCS district arrogantly feels they are above all that, that they deserve more just because they can get away with bullying and extortion. Remember that voters have spoken twice in the last six months, saying no to a new levy, because we can't afford to pay more. So what is the example the school board is sending to the students? If you don't get your way, cry and complain until they give in. And what example does this set for democracy? If you don't like the outcome of an election, come back until you get your way, regardless of how the voters feel. This is the biggest disgrace I've ever seen, what sheer arrogance on the part of the school board. They should be ashamed of themselves! Voters, vote these bums out, and vote "NO" to this levy. Send the cockroaches back under the rocks they came from.

nomoretaxes wrote:

The SWCS board should all be voted out. Their concept in a tough economy is one of "we are more important than people feeding their families, keeping their homes, and keeping their cars. Give us money now, who cares how many people get hurt." Every single person and company in this country has had to learn to make do with less, but the SWCS district arrogantly feels they are above all that, that they deserve more just because they can get away with bullying and extortion. Remember that voters have spoken twice in the last six months, saying no to a new levy, because we can't afford to pay more. So what is the example the school board is sending to the students? If you don't get your way, cry and complain until they give in. And what example does this set for democracy? If you don't like the outcome of an election, come back until you get your way, regardless of how the voters feel. This is the biggest disgrace I've ever seen, what sheer arrogance on the part of the school board. They should be ashamed of themselves! Voters, vote these bums out, and vote "NO" to this levy. Send the cockroaches back under the rocks they came from.

It doesn't matter who is on the BOE, or even if the state takes control: the levy will continue to be on the ballot, at probably higher and higher millages (al la Canal Winchester), until it passes. If the district ends up in fiscal emergency, the state will force the BOE, NO MATTER WHO THEY MAY BE AT THAT TIME, to place a levy on the ballot. So if it continues to fail, get used to it. There is no other way to fund schools in Ohio, and even all kinds of union concessions cannot cover the shortfall over time.

nomoretaxes wrote:

Remember that voters have spoken twice in the last six months, saying no to a new levy, because we can't afford to pay more.

Yeah, but you white trash pieces of crap can sure afford your Buckeyes momentos, cases of beer to intoxicate yourselves while you watch your property values drop faster than a stone in the ocean. Real shrewed .. What a bunch of jerks. Let's save $300 so we can watch our community come apart at the seams.

Tired and Retired in GC wrote:

Tammy, what do you mean that they have too many overpaid administrators in SWCS? You would be the first to scream that supervision was bad or that the district was mishandling Federal funds or not doing enough to increase learning. This district is HUGE and it takes every administrator to keep things moving along at a reasonable clip. As for self-sufficient sports, the busses for away games and the cost of officials would suck up most of that money.
Let's face it, folks: what a lot of you want is just not possible. I agree that contracts need to be negotiated carefully and that can be done with new board members. But don't tie the new board's hands by not giving them the funds to work with.

Then explain this, please, Sir - if this levy passes, what will be the board's incentive to renegotiate their contracts in favor of something sustainable over time?

Phil wrote:

If you allow the quality of your schools to deteriorate, then so will the value of your homes. This decrease in housing prices will cost you much more than any tax increase. Few want to buy a home in a town where the schools are junk.

Do you mean that Grove City might actually become the Mecca for the wealthy elites who send their kids to top-notch private schools, very comfortable retirees and the DINKS
(double income - no kids) because the tax rates are low?

That would really suck, wouldn't it?

SO if I am a home owner and have kids I get a double penilty..... No thankyou

tammy..really? You think the sports programs have made a profit in the last few years? You must not go to board meeting or read reports. Maybe you are just one of those who screams and gets involved in education only when a levy rolls around. Don't spout off things you aren't knowledgeable about.

Some idiot on these blogs and town newspapers has been stating for months that layoffs would increase classroom size, just like this article finally stated after 3 levy defeats, possibly 4 levy defeats.

Increase classroom size back toward where it was for generations upon generations at reduced costs.

What would happen if no levy was passed, classroom sizes were increase back to generational norms, sports/band/busing were reinstated, and the test scores were not adversely affected?

Could it be that the solution was here all along? We shall see.

Phil wrote:

If you allow the quality of your schools to deteriorate, then so will the value of your homes. This decrease in housing prices will cost you much more than any tax increase. Few want to buy a home in a town where the schools are junk.

Home values only go down upon sale, if you sell.

There is no evidence that smaller classroom size have improved test scores or increased home values in the SWSC district.

I mention classroom size as smaller classroom size has driven costs through the roof over the that 2-3 decades, to the point that it is unsustainable to the homeowner.

This article is the first one I have finally seen that stated that there is a possibility of increasing classroom size to save money, the direct opposite of reducing classroom size to spend money.

For those of you worried only about the valuation of your homes, pay more attention during your next divorce, please. Your home, your cars, your furniture and your soon-to-be ex is worth ONLY what someone is willing to pay for it to take it off your hands. Market forces and blue books have nothing to do with what these things actually sell for. Currently, banks aren't loaning money, therefore, you house is worth $000,000.00. Its only for the purpose of property tax that it has any value to anyone but you.

On classroom size - The last of us Boomers started kindergarten in 1963. Seven years later, our schools were busting at the seams. Not only did we have 40-50 kids per class, we had teaching students and teacher's aides to back up the teachers. We had split sessions, and we got to share lockers, too. If you lived within two miles of the school, you took the Heel/Toe Express to get you there, and if you didn't have enough sense to get out of the street when a car came by, you got ran over.

And still, with a graduating class of over 800, the drop-out rate was less than 10%.

What did this teach us? Since going to school was about getting an education rather than expressing our individuality and defending our personal space, it taught us to share. It taught us to care about our fellow man and work as teams, not adversaries.

For those of you who constantly scream, "It's for the kids, they are our future," can you be any more selfish? Maybe you ought to sit back and let the kids have their own future, rather than worrying about how they are going to be yours.

Lady wrote:

For those of you worried only about the valuation of your homes, pay more attention during your next divorce, please. Your home, your cars, your furniture and your soon-to-be ex is worth ONLY what someone is willing to pay for it to take it off your hands. Market forces and blue books have nothing to do with what these things actually sell for. Currently, banks aren't loaning money, therefore, you house is worth $000,000.00. Its only for the purpose of property tax that it has any value to anyone but you.
On classroom size - The last of us Boomers started kindergarten in 1963. Seven years later, our schools were busting at the seams. Not only did we have 40-50 kids per class, we had teaching students and teacher's aides to back up the teachers. We had split sessions, and we got to share lockers, too. If you lived within two miles of the school, you took the Heel/Toe Express to get you there, and if you didn't have enough sense to get out of the street when a car came by, you got ran over.
And still, with a graduating class of over 800, the drop-out rate was less than 10%.
What did this teach us? Since going to school was about getting an education rather than expressing our individuality and defending our personal space, it taught us to share. It taught us to care about our fellow man and work as teams, not adversaries.
For those of you who constantly scream, "It's for the kids, they are our future," can you be any more selfish? Maybe you ought to sit back and let the kids have their own future, rather than worrying about how they are going to be yours.

Touching Topic Lady,it is sad but we have turned out the Me generation,it's all about me.....Kids don't want to work to get money,just stand with their hands out,My grandaughter is one,I feel video games have robbed them of reality...I had larger classes in high school too,don't remember having asst. teachers,had one asst. principal for the whole school,we had less than a 10% drop out rate....it's time the State quits dictating class sizes,and the unions running over the people(taxpayers) then what money that is collected will last longer,instead of expend it this year so we can just ask for more next,I'll be glad when this one is over,Rob starlett,adam slane,Jo Ellen Myers seem to be the better choices on the board....

Tired and Retired in GC wrote:

Tammy, what do you mean that they have too many overpaid administrators in SWCS? You would be the first to scream that supervision was bad or that the district was mishandling Federal funds or not doing enough to increase learning. This district is HUGE and it takes every administrator to keep things moving along at a reasonable clip. As for self-sufficient sports, the busses for away games and the cost of officials would suck up most of that money.
Let's face it, folks: what a lot of you want is just not possible. I agree that contracts need to be negotiated carefully and that can be done with new board members. But don't tie the new board's hands by not giving them the funds to work with.

Look at the long list of administrators in Central Office. These are people you never see in any school building. They do not keep our children safe, they never see our children. Yes they are overpaid and there are too many administrators!