response to March 15th article in News-Sun

The following are comments from the Springfield News-Sun article titled, "Northeastern board to discuss last chance at raising construction funds", written by Megan Gildow. As promised, I am responding to the comments with facts and truth. You have the option to "believe it or not". However, you also have the obligation to get the truth before making statements that jeopardize the education of children.If the comments are similar, I will respond only once.

"NELSB needs to quit beating this dead horse.school will be out soon so they should be geting contractors ready to make proper repairs
fix it
11:19 PM, 3/14/2010"

Thank you for your comment. If you have attended any of our meetings, you would know the shape of our buildings. The cost to "make the proper repairs" would be throwing good money after bad. We are making repairs as they come along. It is the large repairs that take large sums of money away from the "proper" repairs. As I have stated many times before, the board would not even consider this if the opportunity to get new facilities with someone else willing to pay part of the cost had not been given. We would have come to you for Permanent Improvement funds.



"If you just want to repair the schools, you will still need a levy to fund those repairs which would be quite significant, and no funds from the state for repairs, so the cost would be funded 100% from the community.
JC
11:31 PM, 3/14/2010"

JC: thank you for your comment. Point well taken. Likewise the cost to build new schools will be absorbed 100% by the community if we fail to get the opportunity of the OFSC money.



"NO MORE TAXES"
Taxpayer
1:20 AM, 3/15/2010

Taxpayer: thank you for your comment. Please come to the meeting on the 18th and give us your thoughts on how we can continue to operate our buildings without the property taxes. We need your suggestions.



"I see that German Township is now running their Radar units in Moorefield Township.
This is in the area of Rt. 68 North and Rt.334.
Maybe we should think about getting rid of the Deputy that is paid to work in Moorefield Township and us his payroll for the School.
Income"

Income: thank you for your comment. Don't know how much he gets paid, but if it is enough to fix our buildings, sounds like a viable alternative.



"Gee, NELSD beaten any dead horses recently? I do believe the people have spoken, actually, they have spoken twice in the last six months. Sure throw it on the ballot again, I love exercising my right to vote. I'll, again, be voting no just like the other 60% of the voters who voted.
NE Resident"

NE Resident: thank you for your comment. First, we are not throwing out the same plan. We did hear from the residents that this was not the plan they wanted. Our meeting on the 18th is for YOU to tell us what you would support. What we presented in November and February was what we felt was the best alternative for educating children with the opportunity we had for the OSFC's share of funding. On the 18th we are looking to the community to give their suggestions as to what will work for them. Hope to see you there.



"You know this would really be triple dipping - not double dipping. So let me get this right - we are still paying the PRESENT LEVY - then you will be adding TWO (2) additional charges to me if I vote for this. What DON'T you people REAALIZE - That MILLIONS OF JOBS HAVE BEEN LOST IN THE LAST 18 months AND PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING JUST TO KEEP THEIR HOMES AND FOOD ON THE TABLE. State funds or not THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO BUILD NEW SCHOOLS. Repairs - tho costly are still cheaper.
fed up with waste and neglect
6:05 AM, 3/15/2010"

fed up with waste and neglect: thank you for your comment. The present levy, a 1 mill continuous permanent improvement levy was voted on in order to become eligible for the OSFC's share of the funds for new facilities. I don't understand the "triple dipping" comment. We are not going to put 2 levies on the ballot. We can no longer put an income tax on the ballot due to the law. Yes, us people do realize the state of the economy, but even when the economy was strong, the people voted down levies. Repairing our current facilities will continue, however, at what point do we stop throwing good money after bad facilities? Please come to the meeting on the 18th of March and help us work through this. We can all be part of the solution or part of the problem.



"You ask is it really that much more money? Yes it is. When you already have the highest tax rate in the county, when there are more people laid off then in th 1970's, when so money homes are already in trouble. I work for a bank and a lot of and I mean a lot of folks have filed for a modification to their mortage as they can't affored to pay the amount orginally agreed upon due to the economy. So if you put more taxes on them, what do they do? No more modifications will be allowed.
Cindy
6:12 AM, 3/15/2010"

Cindy: thank you for your comment. First, we do not have the highest tax rate in the county. Please update yourself on the Clark County Auditor's office website. They will show you that Northeastern Local School District is not the highest. Again, I emphasize that this is an opportunity for someone to help pay for new schools. I agree that it is probably the worst time, but we have no choice in the timing.



"I have a college degree, and I've had no trouble at all finding work. Of course it's hard to find a job when you have no college experience. If it's really that much money maybe you should live somewhere else? I'm sure Springfield city has lower taxes. All of these people say they don't have any money, but I'm sure they can afford their cigarettes and alcohol...where are the priorities?
Marie
6:24 AM, 3/15/2010"

Marie: thank you for your comment. My only comment is that people have choices and can exercise their choice. Everyone has their priorities.



"Moorefield township does not have the highest tax rate in the county. Check your facts on the auditor site. Yes, we are all hurting, but it will cost less than $30 a month to have brand new schools. Bet if your kid asked to take music lessons or sports coaching at $30 a month - most of you wouldn't think twice. I remember my niece eating lunch in the hallway at Northridge 20 years ago. You cannot compare 40 year old schools to 40 year old houses unless hundreds of people use your house.
tacomom
6:32 AM, 3/15/2010"

tacomom: thank you for your comment. We have 3758 kids going through our buildings daily. For the buildings of South Vienna (895), Northridge (1002), Northeastern (532), Rolling Hills (580), Kenton Ridge (749). That's a lot of flushing, washing, opening and closing doors, etc. After 40 minutes any home with this kind of usage would be in need of repairs, maintenance and upgrade.



"Guess What ! having a new school does not give you a better education, Look at the facts, It is only if you want a better education, Put the importance back on the home life, not the building that takes the kids in for hours each day, I did without , so the kids today can do without, nothing wrong with that, Still got an education, still support my family, I will vote no for this as many times as it comes on the ballot , as I feel it is a WASTE OF MONEY
lived in NE for 30 yrs
6:55 AM, 3/15/2010"

lived in NE for 30 years: thank you for your comment. I've lived in this district for 58 years. When I graduated from NEHS in 1965, a basic education was sufficient to get a job anywhere. But that was then. This is now. The economy is different, laws are different, people are different and society is different. Buildings with technology do make better education for kids than the "one-room" school house of yesterday. We all did without, but we also want a better life and future for our kids. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts at our meeting on the 18th. at Northeastern High School. It starts at 6 PM.



"When will the school board listen to the majority of the voters we don't want you to use the states money for schools. Look at Springfield Local and Northwestern after accepting those funds. Back to the voters hat in hand. NEHS was built without any debt. Most of the homeowners who live in the district are either retired or financially strapped. No new school taxes!!
3 generations @ NEHS"

3 generations @ NEHS: thank you for your comment. I cannot respond to how building NEHS was funded. First, this is not the "states" money. It is money from the Tobacco Settlement that was given to the states for their use. Ohio opted to use the money to build new schools. There is no tax dollars used from the OSFC. Secondly, Springfield Local is now Clark-Shawnee who has not been eligible for the OSFC funding (you probably mean Springfield City Schools). Unfortunately, school districts in Ohio have no other recourse but to go to the voters for new schools. This is the way schools are funded in Ohio.



"I'm really getting tired of the NE school board! Again, NO, NO, NO! Also, everyone in the school district is not as dumb as you think. You keep harping on the fact that the state is going to pay 41% of the cost. Where does the state money come from? Answer, from the taxpayers. So the local taxpayer is actually paying 100% of the cost!
Paul
7:51 AM, 3/15/2010"

Paul: thank you for your comment. First, the money from the OSFC is not taxpayer money. If you would do your research or ask the people who know, you would find out that the money is from the tobacco settlement that was awarded to each state. Ohio opted to use the funds to build new schools. It is not taxpayer money. If we fail to take advantage of this we will have to fund 100% of the cost. Your choice.



"Funding for new schools needs to go away from the property owners.Some districts in Ohio did just that, they imposed a income tax.
buckeye
7:51 AM, 3/15/2010"

buckeye: thank you for your comment. I've always felt funding an education in Ohio by using property tax is not only stupid, but it is unconstitutional. I have fought to get this changed for the past 16 years, only to fall on deaf ears at the State House. I feel an income tax would not be the way to go because it eliminates those retired people who enjoy the benefits of strong property values as a result of good schools. This is also not fair to those who work. In order to fund the local portion of our budget in the district, it would take a very large income tax which would not be popular and would get voted down very quickly.



"I wander if we all shouldn't meet in the middle on this. Is it really necessary to build 6 new buildings? How about building 2 new high schools and 2 new middle schools and then use the current middle schools as elemenatary schools. There has to be a middle ground that we all can meet on.
HMMMM
7:52 AM, 3/15/2010"

HMMM: thank you for your comment. This is the purpose of the meeting on the 18th. We are not putting the plan back on the ballot. We are trying to find some common ground that the public will agree with. Please come to the meeting and voice your suggestion. Hopefully it will be the one that works.



"marie, tacomom & all supporters of NESD tax levies.
as i have said many times the word is DONATE
you bunch of tightwads with children in school
DONATE!!!
If all parents would DONATE $500.00 per child there
would be no need to depend tax levies.
Now get in there and "DONATE" or are you planing to
rely on us to pay for your child's College also???
DONATE
8:18 AM, 3/15/2010"

DONATE: thank you for your comment. Let's look at a $500 donation from the parents in the district. We know there are 3758 kids in the district. If parents donated $500 per child, the total would be $1,879,000. Our budget is approximately $30,000,000 of which 49% comes from the state and 1% from the federal government. This means that $15 million would be needed to meet the local share. In that case the parents would need to donate $3992.00 for each child. However, everyone in the district would be able to take advantage of the strong property values that comes with good schools. Is this fair? I think not.



"I want to know why the school district can keep putting a levy back on the ballot after the voters have already said no. Just because they are not happy with the out come. If a levy passed and the tax payers weren't happy with that, can they put the issue back on the ballot to have it revoked. I doubt it! So why is the school district allowed to keep putting the issue before the voters? It is a waste of our money. They need to respect the voter’s decision and move on. NO MORE TAXES!!!!!!!!
Sam
8:19 AM, 3/15/2010"

Sam: thank you for your comment. If you go to the website for the district and find the list of ballot issues the district has put on the ballot since 1969, you would find that in May of 2003 the district had a 4.3853 mill bond issue which it withdrew from the ballot. So yes, we can do it. If the board of education backed down every time a ballot was voted down, our buildings, our educational system and our schools would be in shambles, your property values would be very poor, and the future of our children would be dismal. We are looking at a different plan, but need the input of people in the district, like you, to help us. Looking forward to your input at our meeting on the 18th of March.



"One High School, one community. Look at Tecumseh H.S. and Springfield High School. Why does the board think we need two high schools that just plain out of the question. Build one elementary & midddle school in South Vienna and convert and remodel K.R. into an elementary and middle school. And build one nice high school.......
N.E.L.S.D. Resident
8:27 AM, 3/15/2010"

N.E.L.S.D. Resident: thank you for your comment. One high school was an option that the vast majority of the public did not agree on, otherwise we would have put this on the ballot. We are looking for new ideas. Please come to the meeting on the 18th and give us your thoughts on what you feel will be a solution.



"They let in all these open enrollment kids - WHO LIVE IN OTHER DISTRICTS - then they cry because they got no place to put them. Kick them out!
No
8:38 AM, 3/15/2010"

NO: thank you for your comment. Open enrollment is a money issue. We do not bring kids in because it is overcrowded. We bring them in for the following reasons. (1) we have kids who leave our district to go to other districts for whatever reason. Every time a child leaves the district we lose $5780. We need to compensate for the loss. (2). We bring in kids and put them in classes where space is available. With each kid, we get $5780 which is used to hire teachers without using your tax funds! Currently we have 117 kids leaving the district and taking with them $676,000. We are bringing in 211 kids for a total of $1,220,000. The additional kids are placed in classes that have space available without overcrowding a class. The difference between what we lost and what we gained, $544,000 is used to hire 10 teachers without getting into your share of the local funding! Saying NO to open enrollment would mean that we would lose the 10 teachers that cost you nothing plus an additional 14 teachers caused by the kids currently going out of the district.



"This is a great source of entertainment and shouldn't be. Other citizens paid taxes for your public education, your parents public education and your grandparents public education....it's just the way it works. Go to the meeting and add your input-after all that is what the meeting is about. If you don't go and something doesn't go your way, then don't complain!
pepper
9:05 AM, 3/15/2010"

pepper: thank you for your comment. Nothing to add. Well said.



"The 41% is not taxpayer money, it's tobacco settlement money. Q&A from the OSFC website:

Where does the OSFC get its money?
The commission manages money appropriated by the legislature. Originally, it received money from the state budget, but right now, 100% of the money is coming from the tobacco securitization money.

Millions will go to school districts. NE voters are fools if they don't take it - the district where I teach are really enjoying our new buildings!
Not so local teacher"

Not so local teacher: thank you for your comment. How have your property values been effected?


"Open enrollment is not the problem.Kids leave this district to go to schools in other districts. The money follows the kids. A little over $5000 per kid is what you lose when a child goes to a school in another district. I think they said at the last board meeting about 100-120 kids leave the school district. That's about $500,000 -$600,000 lost to the district if you don't accept kids from other districts. The only way it works your way is if you get rid of open enrollment for every district.
JC
9:46 AM, 3/15/2010"

JC: thank you for your comment. You are correct. Don't forget about the 10 teachers we hire because of Open Enrollment kids that is not paid by our tax payers, but be concerned about the 14 additional teachers we would lose if we stopped open enrollment.



"Enough is enough. Money is tight. Does any one have any idea how much the district has spent trying to get there way. Great thing to teach our children complain until you get your way. The idea of closing one of the high schools and going to just one, is absurd if the buildings are so full now how is that going to solve any problems, oh wait, so in another year you can complain about being soooo full. Give me a break. Building new schools is not going to improve education.
NE RESIDENT for 50 years"

NE RESIDENT: Thank you for your comment. I can meet you half way on this. New schools will allow us the technology that we currently cannot provide because of the electrical infrastructure and the quality of air in the buildings. Put our quality teachers in facilities with good technology and see what can be produced. Yes, money is tight, but doing nothing is not benefiting our children and their future. I personally am thinking more of them than myself.



"I'm so sick of hearing about this. Enough is enough already! It was voted on twice and both times it failed. Get over it! Repair it and go on. Are you really going to bull doze your home because it has some issues? And don't tell me it is so horrible to sit in the school. Not so long ago I was there and I survived. These students are spoiled brats these days. I've been to some of their homes and I must say, the school looks like the Hilton. Look at Brookside trailor's!
NO!
9:54 AM, 3/15/2010"

NO! thank you for your comment. The plan we put on in November and February will not be put on again. We are wanting the people to give their input on what they find reasonable. If doing nothing and putting money into our current buildings is their disire, then this is what the board will do. I disagree with that process, however, the public is the ones I report to. In todays global market and economy, it is no longer enough to "survive". We must let our kids become competitive. We can't do that in our current buildings.



"I suppose that all of you will blame the school board for reduced test scores and your children not succeeding when we are unable to recruit or keep the greatly talented educators we now have. I hear many people talking about how it was good enough for them, so it is good enough for their kids. Do your kids have cell phones, video games, cars, etc.? Yes. Did you? For many the answer is no, so that argument just doesn't hold up. Invest in the future, show your kids you want better for them.
nelsdsupporter
9:58 AM, 3/15/2010"

nelsdsupporter: thank you for your comment. Good point.



"Please don't post if you are ignorant of the issue at hand, which is most of the people posting on here. Please do your research, start attending board meetings, and being INVOLVED in the school district. These kids are the future. Please don't punish their quality of education just because you do not agree with what the board does. I do not agree with what the board does, but I went to meetings and spoke up about it. And I was a student. Voice your opinion at the meetings.
HB
10:02 AM, 3/15/2010"

HB: thank you for your comment. As a student, I am proud that you speak up and share your thoughts even though we may no agree. The best argument is one in which both sides are aware of the issues and the facts surrounding the issues.



"I have given my concerns to a board member. The response was that I just didn't understand the issues. The issue is this levy and income tax is set for 37 years. Mark my words, once the the new buildings are built an operational levy will be added to maintain the new schools. Over 37 years I will end up paying an additional $35,000.00 to my exsisting tax liability and I'll be 90 years old. Drop the income tax and combine the schools! My wife and I work hard, but I am running out of money!
pauly
10:19 AM, 3/15/2010"

pauly: thanks for your comment. For the cost of our new buildings, under the previous plan, the cost for a $100,000 home would be approximatley $330.00 plus an additional $100 income tax. Over the course of 37 years the cost would be $15,910 if you lived in a $100,000 home and your income was $40,000 annually. However, the amount of property tax would decrease as more people moved into the district as the cost would be shared by more people. When you don't understand the issues, it is time to start asking questions about the issues.



"The board really needs to let go of the phrase "Two Campuses one Community". This has lead to a single minded way of thinking. If the board would distance themselves from the catchy little slogan maybe they could put all of their little pea brains together and come up with a plan that will please the majority. The majority does not seemed to be for the 2 campus idea...come up with a plan that works, its what you are paid for.
Marcia
10:35 AM, 3/15/2010"

Marcia: thank you for your comment. You are correct! That's what the meeting on the 18th is about. We want you to help those of us with "little pea brains" come up with an option that you will accept. Hope to see you there.



"Pauly is correct about the operational levy coming at us next, as it is a question I asked at one of the meetings a few months back. Mr. Broderick (sp) answered me honestly saying that "of course they would need to pass an operation levy" but he assured me that they would not try to do this until "at least 2 years after this bond passes" because he was aware that there was "no way voters would be ready to pass the operational levy so soon after the bond". Rather deceptive, don't you think?
The rest of the story
10:44 AM, 3/15/2010"

The rest of the story: thank you for your comment. Nothing about deception with Mr. Broderick's statement. Yes, due to many factors such as inflation (cost of goods and services rising) and increased cost of operating our buildings, yes, we would be coming back in a couple of years. Nothing deceptive about it. Personally, it is better than a Permanent Improvement levy to continue putting money into the buildings we have, only to have to close one or two due to some catastrophic problem and having to build new in 4 or 5 years. But that is the voter's choice.



"HB, I went to one of the meetings where you submitted questions on a piece of paper!! Then somebody CHOSE which questions on those pieces of paper would be answered. That's free speech? That's open discussion? They don't want to hear anything they don't agree with. I'm sick of the whole thing - NO MEANS NO. Fix what we have and move forward. I'm not committing my grandkids to pay for something YOU want but don't need. You can learn anywhere if there are good teachers.
NS
10:45 AM, 3/15/2010"

NS: thank you for your comment. First, I am the one who "CHOSE" which question to be asked. I guarantee you that I am not selective, nor do I not allow anyone to speak. If there are similar comments on the same subject, I ask the individual if they have anything different to add to the issue. If they don't then, for the sake of time, ther is no reason for them to say the same thing. This is free speech at its best and definately an open forum. Be sure to fill out your blue sheet when you come to the meeting on the 18th. Let me know who you are and you'll be the first to speak.



"To NO!: I wouldn't bulldoze my home to build a new one; Darn right I'd repair it. However, you tell my you are going pay for half of a new home? I'd be revving that diesel engine this morning and taking the first run at it!

You are being offered FREE MONEY for new buildings!! Take it and run!!!
stan
10:48 AM, 3/15/2010"

stan: thank you for your comment. I agree. If someone was offering me 41% of the cost of a new home, I would find a way to pay for it. Anyway, the value would be more than I had in the home.



"LMAO! How is it "free money" when you have your taxes raised? My home is over 200,000 dollars. That's a big increase for me. Are you exempt?
NO!
11:07 AM, 3/15/2010"

NO!: thank you for your comment. What is "free money" is the 41% of the cost of the buildings. Using the figures from the November plan, the cost of the buildings amounted to $111,000,000.00 of which 46,000,000 was coming the OSFC tobacco settlement funds. These are tax free funds.



"REDUCE THE NUMBER OF SCHOOLS BEING BUILT AND I MIGHT VOTE ON IT.ONE LARGE HIGH SCHOOL. ONE LARGE MIDDLE SCHOOL WITH GRADE SCHOOL KIDS.
CAROL MCNEIL
11:13 AM, 3/15/2010"

Carol McNeil: thank you for your comment. I will present this plan as an option. I don't agree that this is what is best for kids, however, it is a viable option that may work. I hope you get the opportunity to come to the meeting on the 18th and present this option.



"So after reading these comments I have come to the conclusion that NELSD is nothing more than a low income housing area now. How sad. It was nice to know that at one time they were the place to live. Aparently not now. Too many low income people with no potential for growth. I say don't waste your money updating your home as no one is going to buy it. Would you if you had kids. Maybe it is ok for a senior citizen area but not familes. Who knew.
basketball fand
11:17 AM, 3/15/2010"

basketball fand: thank you for your comment. As a resident of this district I hava always believed this was the best place to live, raise and educate children, and I'm certain you do to. It is unfortunate that we are having these difficulties, especially with those who are uninformed, misinformed or "don't want to be informed".



"They are right about coming at you for an operational levy soon after passing this one. Just look across the county at NW, who didn't even wait 6 months to come back for more.
TEA
11:18 AM, 3/15/2010"

TEA: thank you for your comment. We have never denied that we would not be coming with an operational levy. As Mr. Broderick stated, it will be in a couple of years only due to inflation and operational cost in the district. It will be an operational levy that you, as a resident, will have the option to vote for or against.



"People with jobs and college degrees will NOT want to move into the Northeastern Local School District if the public schools are not supported by the taxpayers. Educational requirements for children are only going to increase in the coming years with the adoption of the National Standards. The graduation requirements for my generation were MEAGER compared to what my child must do. And those that come later will only have to learn more. And you want this to happen in substandard buildings?
Northeastern Local Resident
12:54 PM, 3/15/2010"

Northeastern Local Resident: thank you for your comment. I totally agree with your message. Our schools are representative of our community and they determine the value of our property. People have moved into our district because of our schools. We need to make our schools stronger, simply because of what you stated about the standards that are coming. I never thought about my education being meager until I compared it to the requirements our children must meet today. Personally, I have a college degree, however, I don't know if I can meet the requirements of todays education standards. Thank you.



"ARE YOU KIDDING ME THESE SMART AND COLLEGE DEGREE PEOPLE ARE DOING THIS AGAIN. TO THE PERSON THAT SAID SMART COLLEGE DEGREE PEOPLE WON'T MOVE IN THE AREA IF WE DON'T PASS THE LEVY. LADY IT IS NOT ABOUT EDUCATION,IT IS ABOUT AFFORDABLTY. WHEN YOU TAXES ARE ALREADY HIGH, WHY WOULD ANYONE VOTE TO MAKE THEM HIGHER.
NOBODY WILL MOVE INTO AN AREA IF THEY CANNOT AFFORD THE TAXES.
LARRY
1:04 PM, 3/15/2010"

LARRY: Thank you for your comment. Sorry to say, it is about need and opportunity. As I stated before, we would not be doing this if the opportunity was not available. It is never an issue of affordibility. If it was, we wouldn't vote for road levies, emergency levies, MRDD levies, upcoming library levies. It only school levies that people reject. This doesn't make sense when it is the schools that effect one's property values. People don't move into a community because of good roads or good fire departments...it is because of good schools and strong property values.



"How did we get 2 High Schools? The people in NR wanted it that way. If you have attended any of the Board Meetings, you would know that 1 super high school, 1 super middle school, and 1 super elementary, is contrary to the State Plan for smaller schools. It would also cost more to operate because we would need more teachers. And since the school would be in the center of the district, it would require more Buses, and transportation cost would at least double, It's not realistic.
NE GRAD 2
1:17 PM, 3/15/2010"

NE GRAD 2: thank you for your comment. Also don't forget, one big high school would cause more disciplinary problems. The number of teachers would not decrease because the number of teachers is directly related to the number of students. Likewise for administrators and many staff personnel. Also, we would have to buy a large portion of land for the buildings. In addition, athletic facilities, which we already have, would need to be rebuilt - not with board funds - but just like the ones we already have, by the public. I personally do not support one big high school


"Additionally, everybody says it is for the kids. This fact will happen, the 1 school concept, will keep a bunch of the kids out of sports, band, choir, drama club, and plays, because there will be to many to allow everyone to participate. So this means everyone will have to tryout, and ALL STUDENTS who try out, win NOT get to participate. So now we will have more kids on the street getting into trouble. Is that what we want for our kids? Bigger is not better. Rebuild what we have.
NE GRAD 2
1:23 PM, 3/15/2010"

NE GRAD 2: nothing to add, thank you



"NELSD cannot use the tobacco settlement money to fix up, only to build new. It's not tax money. They most likely will come back in the near future for operating money-that will happen regardless because of the way Ohio funds schools. I work & live in the Tec. District and yes my property taxes went up. BUT I now work in a beautiful building that my students and parents are so proud of. It's about a dollar a day or for you in the $200,000 house - two dollars a day. Your kids are worth it.
tacomom
4:19 PM, 3/15/2010"

tacomom: thank you for your comment. We looked into the valuation of the property values in Bethel Township (Tecumseh School District) and found the valuation did increase the first period after the new schools were built. Yes, kids are worth it.



"NEW ADMINISTRATORS,NEW A.D.AT NE AND NEW BOARD MEMBERS WOULD PROBABLY CHANGE THE RESULTS OF TAX LEVIES.
FED UP
4:27 PM, 3/15/2010"

FED UP: thank you for your comment. If I thought that this levy would pass if I resigned today, I would have done it yesterday. Also, if that was the case, why did the last election of board members run unopposed? There were 3 positions open for election and no one ran against us.



"It's not about the money so much as the lies we have all been told in the past. Look at the levy passed to fix the roof? Was it done? No! Kids were still dodging trash cans the following year. Why does this keep going back up to be voted on? Was there a second vote for a different president because people complained? Or the smoking law? Or any other thing? NO! Quit hassling us! NO MEANS NO!!!! It should only be allowed to be voted on ONCE! NOT THREE TIMES! Leave it alone!
NO!
4:36 PM, 3/15/2010"


NO! again, thank you for your comment. First, the levy to fix the roofs was used to fix the roofs. They were replaced as promised. Did they leak? Yes. This is indicative of flat roofs when there is a lot of rain. Were they repaired under warranty? yes. No tax dollars was used to repair the roofs. I don't understand you point on a second vote for a different president because people complained. If you are referring to the President of the Board, that position is voted on by the board members, not the public.



"I am against one campus -- if I had wanted my children to go the Kenton Ridge, I would have moved to northridge. The Northeastern school district needs to prove that they are for the kids. Let go of some of your employees that are "double dipping". Some new faces and ideas would make the district a lot better. If they want my vote a lot of things need to change
northeastern parent
5:29 PM, 3/15/2010"

northeastern parent: thank you for your comment. The "double dippers" have saved this district a lot of money. There is a lot to this issue that needs to be explained. It is not illegal, immoral or unethical as many feel it is. It is an issue that, once explained, becomes clearer that it has good fiscal benefits to the district. If you have new ideas (and certainly a new face), we would be willing to listen and get you involved in making changes. Hope to see you at the meeting on the 18th.