Taxpayer Monies Could Be Used To Explain Impact Of Failed Levy
Alternative content
SWCS Taxpayer Monies
Should a city pay to promote its school-district tax?
NBC 4
BOTH SIDES: NBC 4 talks to city leaders and residents about a proposal to use taxpayer money to educate citizens about the impact of a failed levy in the South-Western City Schools district.
GROVE CITY, Ohio—City leaders in Grove City are considering spending about $20,000 in taxpayer money to send out educational information regarding the South-Western City Schools levy.
A school district has been pleading for a levy passage while a hometown fears failure would mean a loss of jobs and income tax revenue and falling property values.
The South-Western City School District voted to go back to voters in August, asking for the same 8.3-mill operating levy that was voted down in May.
There is a proposal to use taxpayer money to educate citizens about the impact of a failed levy in the South-Western City Schools district.
Should a city pay to promote its school district’s tax, though?
NBC 4’s Ana Jackson talked to residents and officials and got BOTH SIDES OF THE STORY.
More district cuts would mean a big blow to Grove City, according to Don Walters, business and community relations officer for the city.
“That impact on the city would be phenomenal, financially, because those employees pay income taxes,” Walter said.
Walters said South-Western City Schools is the largest employer in Grove City, and the first round of cuts already has cost the city about $100,000 a year in income-tax revenue.
City leaders have been considering a proposal to spend $10,000 to $20,000 taxpayer dollars to educate citizens about the economic impact of a failed levy, Walters said.
The monies would come from the city’s advertising budget, and the city would do the same for any big business in crisis.
Resident Nancy Smith said she’s OK with the expenditure.
“I care about the kids. I care about the people in my neighborhood. I care about my property values, and if we don’t start supporting schools, we’re all going to be very disappointed,” Smith said.
Resident Terry Jones, however, was outraged about the proposal. Jones is the president of South-Western Alternatives to Taxes, a political-action committee that opposes the ballot issue.
“I think it’s an inappropriation of taxpayers’ money. Why? Because they’re taking sides with one side of the community against the other part,” Jones said.
“It’s really still very fair in that all we’re doing is explaining. We’re not telling anybody to go vote Issue 2,” Walters said.
Jackson spoke to a member of the Grove City council who said the proposal still is new and nothing would be decided outside of regularly scheduled council meetings.
The next city council meeting was set for Monday, June 15.
For additional information, stay with nbc4i.com and NBC 4 and refresh nbc4i.com—Where Accuracy Matters.
To submit a story idea or news tip, e-mail us at
.
NBC 4 POLITICS: Headlines, Interactives & Video
MORE: NBC 4 Local News | Local Crime News
NBC 4 SPORTS: Sports News, Video
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Including the delusion that our teachers are better than all the rest.Our test scores and graduation rates prove this simply isn’t true.
These"long term contract"teachers aren’t going anywhere.They are payed very well for the minimal hours that they actually work.
Your silence speaks volumes.You know it’s wrong to take money from our destitute community(far west side+Galloway)to build up your citys tax base.How is this possible that we sacrifice for something that provides nothing to us in the form of job creation or growth?Where are our matching funds to explain our positition and what this levy means to us?More homeless families,more forclosed upon homes.Obviously Grove City couldn’t care less about our economic crisis;our empty businesses,our forclosures,our children living in abject poverty- as long as WE FINANCE THEIR EXTRAVAGANCE!
These businesses that stand to bebefit or lose revenue should sponsor the sports teams that bring in this money for them.It is completely wasteful to use my desperately needed tax dollars for sports and clubs.Pay to play!
Also,my property has already lost a third of its value due to forclosures all around me.These forclosures cannot be purchased because almost no one makes a qualifying income.I’m not looking to preserve my homes value-I’m looking to KEEPING my roof over my head!
OK Grove City what’s in it for us on the far west side and in Galloway?You want us to support your wasteful out of touch with the current state of the economy spending to preserve your tax revenue?OUTRAGEOUS!
Let the teachers go elsewhere if they cannot understand the economic climate and that our district is broke/broken.We need teachers that understand you can’t come to the voters that are unemployed,bankrupt and having their taxes taken despite the unconstitutionality of it.There is no shortage of teachers that would be happy to work for our district for less.They pass the same tests and do the same work(and more)for less in rural districts.
I’d like to ask Laura to define wasteful spending and provide specific examples. I’d also like to point out that the board did make concessions as pointed out in the Dispatch article - more cuts were made because the public asked them to tighten their belt.
For all of you who want to vote no because you don’t like the way the school board is operating, exercise your vote in November when those up for re-election run again. More importantly, tell your state reps that you won’t stand for the unconstitutional way that Ohio is funding schools. Funnel your discontent this way - it’s the most productive thing you can do to be part of a solution rather than part of a problem.
Note that no vote on Issue Two will cost you far more than your support. Here are the reasons why:
1. We will lose property value and it will take many, many years to regain it – if we regain it – many people depend on maintaining or growing the value of their property to fund their retirement, college tuition or the cost of extended care for seniors.
2. We will lose revenue from income tax as a result of staff reductions. This revenue is used to fund city operations such as police, parks and recreation, senior services, and infrastructure that benefits every of us.
3. Our businesses like restaurants, retail stores and gas stations, will lose sales because we’ll see a major drop in visitors who come to our district for extra-curricular activities and events sponsored not only by the district but by locally-run organizations that use our school facilities.
4. Our district will lose bed tax revenue because our hotels and motels won’t have visitors staying over for extra-curricular events sponsored by the district and those organizations using district facilities.
5. Many businesses will lose income from families that have typically relied on them for products and services such as dry cleaning, musical instruments, uniforms, food, gas, awards and supplies.
6. Our district will lose opportunities to attract businesses that bring with them income tax and much-needed job opportunities for our residents.
7. Our district will lose the ability to attract new residents, particularly families with kids, who contribute to the economic viability of our community.
8. Our district will lose students whose families will make the choice to send them elsewhere or move - in fiscal year 09, every time a student left a public school district, $5,720 in funding went with them. When people move, their support of the community goes with them, as does their money.
9. Our district will lose great teachers who’ve devoted their life’s work, and much money out of their own pocket, to other districts who value them for their dedication.
Every one of our district residents will lose if we vote no.
Well according to the Dispatch SWCS intends to go back to business as usual if/when the levy is passed.No significant changes-no thinking outside the box.
They intend to continue wasteful spending on sports,clubs and newly negotiated contracts.What a disappointment!
They’ve given no consideration to what us as a community has suggested.No even partial contributions to pay to play sports(that serve a minority of students),no actual pay for use of facilities-nothing.
If we give into this cohersion,we can expect more of the same.I’d hope that these high priced"talking heads"could’ve come up with ANY new ideas to attempt to win the votes of previous NO voters.
They could’ve at least thrown us a bone.My vote will still be NO,due to their outright refusal to make any significant changes that would show an appreciation for the sacrifice we taxpayers are asked to make.Instead,they have proven that they are out of touch with the economic reality facing the majority of us in our community.
We must stand united against the wasteful spending of our hard earned money.
Pay to play and use of facilities would save alot of taxpayer money.Taht won’t solve everything,but it is only fair.
Private sponsorship and donations could also help,but won’t be considered.
We would like to operate like we did in the “good ol’ days”,but cannot in todays economy.
That goes for teacher/administrator pay as well.The money isn’t there.To promise increases(contractually)is total mismanagement that smacks in the face the people that pay their salaries-they(taxpayers) said repeatedly NO.
What would you tell a child that refused to take NO for an answer?This is the lesson our future generations are being taught-just pester and manipulate-you’ll get what you want,whether the money is there or not.
...and we circle back around to pay to play. Where do we start and stop pay to play? Pay to play bussing? Pay to play English as a second language classes? Pay to play AP college courses? Pay to play field trips for the elementary kids? Pay to play for National Honor Society? Pay to play special education?
Pay to play does not and will not solve this issue one bit. It will not generate the revenue needed to solve all issues. If it would, I’d be all for it.
If you’re feeling manipulated, then by logic your argument should be with the board and administration policies. Attack those, not the funding itself. Please take your arguments to a school board meeting. Take them to the state, who has allowed this travesty to even be here with their unconstitutional method of school funding. The funding is just a symptom of what you’re describing is wrong. Why cut that off when we (the public) can act against the source of the issue?
And your cuts left out the truth that the remaining teachers/administrators will get their increases when a levy is passed(per contract).They will get their increases whether a levy is passed or not(per contract).
The clubs could pay true use cost of facilities and asked to,but were shot down by the board.Same with sports.
Their contracts guarantee their pay increases(teachers).
All of those eliminated positions become necessary when schools are closed due to low enrollment.
They(SWCS) should cut all extras,institute pay to play,institute true cost for clubs and renegotiate freezes to any and all upcoming contracts.
Then come to the taxpayers with another revised levy request.They should be totally forthcoming with the facts of teacher/administrator pay scales but mostly PROMISE TO NEVER USE THIS FORM OF MANIPULATION AGAIN.
They have no right to get the children riled up in something that they truely can’t understand(how they are being used)while they (the kids)are there to be taught-not used as pawns to keep the status quo.
Effective July 1 cuts that will not be restored even with the levy passage
Principal Buckeye Ranch
8.5 Certificated Positions, 3 intervention specialist, 2 K-8 Teachers, 2 K-8 Unified Arts Teachers, 1 Interpreter, .5 Gifted Specialist
2 District Service Center Clerial Workers
Without the passing of the August 4 levy.
no high school busing, extended walk zones for Elementary and Middle School students, closing of buildings and rec centers one hour after school, recuded field trip opportunities, deduced school purchasing services and district budget, closing Harrisburg Elementary, Closing Kingston School ( this is special behavior needs children that will return back into the general classroom- good luck learning in that environment), elimation of athletics, co-curricular activities - yearbook, key club, drama club, the list goes on, Lost of personnel 3 athletic coordinators, 1 alternative education coordinator, HR, 2 Principals, 8 high school teachers, 7.5 K-8 Unified Arts Teachers, 5.5 K-8 Teachers, 2 Intervention Specialists, 1.5 HS Athletic Trainers, 1 Franklin Heights HS Career Tech Teacher, 1 Middle School Coordinator, 1 Work Study Coordinator, 1 Supplemental Service Teacher, .5 Education Tech Teacher, 7.5 K-4 Education Resource Aides, 4 Clerical District Service Center, 4 High School Clerical Staff, 3 Elementary Aides, 2 Bilingual Aides, head Custodians, 1 Computer Operator, 1 Computer Technician, 1 maintenance, 1 mechanic, 1 medication monitor, .5 custodian. This the the reality of what we will loose, the community will loose. This is greatly affect the courses offered to students and students with special needs. This is about their education, not a pay raise. The teachers and all other union members have taken a 1 year pay freeze under their contracts, all of their contracts are up for renegiation so if you have an opposition to their contracts then a board meeting is were you voice your concerns, not saying NO means NO. This is the future of our community. Education should be everyone’s number one priority, because everything is effected by the education offered in our communities.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement