Responses to comments in May 5th article: Part 2

Once again, I come with responses to articles from the Springfield News-Sun concerning the Northeastern Local School District. These responses are from the article dated Friday, May 5, 2010 by Kermit Rowe, titled "Northeastern to seek voter approval for $58.9 million for new schools". Unlike previous comments and questions, I will respond to those that are legitimate and not redundant.

As always, I am speaking on my behalf, not the board's. I recommend that the reader validate my statements so as to ascertain that I am responding with the truth.



"I will continue to Vote No! I can't afford any more taxes. I don't eat out, don't smoke, and don’t drink, so I have nothing else I can cut out of my budget. And if this passes (by some chance) I think the taxpayers should be able to have it put back on the ballot in November to have it revoked. If the schools can keep putting it back on the ballot then so should home owners. The voters have already spoken twice on this issue and they just keep wasting our money putting it back on.KEEP VOTING NO!
NE Resident
1:06 PM, 5/7/2010"


NE Resident: thank you for your comment. If this passes in August, I guess the voters can ask to put it back on the ballot, however there is a cost involved and it is greater than $240 a year. If it is worth it to you, I suggest you go to the board of elections and start the process. Once again, I encourage you to explain how we are wasting your money.



"If the northeastern board would check into some of the business in the district that are back on taxes like Tomorrow Stars campground and Beaver Valley campground that are thousand of dollars back in taxes, you could leave us alone. That's the trouble with the board you always want to stick it to the little people and not check into anything else.There are also kids that live at these campgrounds that there parents pay no taxes,how fair is that.MY VOTE IS NO NO AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!
NO means NO
1:11 PM, 5/7/2010"


NO means NO: thank you for your comment. First, the amount of back taxes by the businesses you mentioned would not be a drop in the bucket toward helping our buildings. Secondly, the voters have a right to vote. The board does not stand at the ballot box with a gun at anyone's head forcing them to vote. I resent the term "little people" because I am one. I work hard every day, earn a living and pay my taxes, just like you and everyone else. Like me, you have a choice at the ballot box.



"Look it is like this. You go to school to learn. It's not about sports and who can sport the most expensive clothes. The main objective of going to school has become a mockery. If you can afford to send your kid to school in Guess jeans and Nikes then you pay the levy. I will always vote no!!You folks keep saying that it's for the kids. Learning is free. You don't need funding for that. They gan teach kids and pay staff on the budget they have. sounds like they want fatter wallets.
Keep it real
1:20 PM, 5/7/2010"


Keep it real: thank you for your comment. I agree that learning is free, unfortunately the cost to teach is not. You need to understand the difference between a bond issue and operating levy. The bond issue is for new schools. The bond issue does not pay salaries, so there is no "fatter wallets". People have choices to make for their kids. I'm not about to tell anyone how to spend their money or dress their kids, that is their choice.



"We will be voting "NO"!!!! Homeowners are tired of always being the ones to pay the price for new schools etc. Until the district comes up with a fair and balanced answer for ALL residents to pay equally we will continue to vote "no".
Homeowner
1:30 PM, 5/7/2010"


Homeowner: thank you for your comment. I remember when I rented an apartment in the district, part of my rent payment was used to cover the taxes on the house. When the taxes increased...so did my rent. I didn't like it but it was also part of renting. I now own my home and I pay taxes. If I ever had any room or building to rent, you can bet I will have the taxes as part of the rent. That's common sense.



"Didn't Ted Strickland promise to fix this issue if elected govenor? Guess 4 years wasn't enough time to get to working on the problem. I don't want to pay out any more in taxes than I have to, but I will if it improves my community. How can Clark County expect to attract companies to the area when we don't have a strong school system? I will vote for the levy just as I have done before.
Bo
1:39 PM, 5/7/2010"


Bo: thank you for your comment. Yes, Gov. Strickland did promise to fix school funding. In fact he said if school funding didn't get fixed he would be considered a
failure as Governor. Guess what? It isn't fixed. He just added more money to a broken system and then applied unfunded mandates that takes the money away. I bet he will be voted in again by the "public school no voters" because they do not have the courage to face him and the legislature. I've been to Columbus and spoke with the Governor and the Legislature and they basically turned a deaf ear to me and other board member's from across the state. Bo, I appreciate the fact that you are seeing this properly. I am encouraged that you and others will do the right thing and start standing up for our educational system.



"JC sounds to me like you are either part of the school board or you are on there side, cause no matter what anybody says you stick up for the school board.Vote is still NO
NO means NO
1:49 PM, 5/7/2010"


NO means NO: thank you for your comment. JC is not on the board, to my knowledge. I am and have put my name on the line in these responses. It is obvious JC has either come to board meetings and asked questions, or has researched the issues or both. Upon reading many of JC's comments, I would guess he has done both since many of the responses he has are very similar to the responses the board gives to the many questions we get at board meeting. It might be beneficial if you would come and do some asking.



"Didn't we just vote for an elderly united levy, yet the retired people in the district don't want to pay for "our kids"?
parent
2:05 PM, 5/7/2010"


parent: thank you for your comment. Surprisingly, there are many retired senior citizens who support our schools! They realize the importance of schools to property values. What is disheartening is that there are many younger parents of voting age who will not register to vote and it is their kids who will benefit from new schools. By the way, thank you for your support.



"NO WAY will I vote for this levy my income is stretched the way it is. Thanks to SODDERS overvaluing houses in the area They have already taken enough in taxes. According to the county Clerk the value of my house is 35K more than what someone would purchase it for. The banks do not want to use the clerks appraisal as most are still otof line. NO on the levy and VOTE SODDERS OUT!!!!
NOWAY
2:27 PM, 5/7/2010"


NOWAY: thank you for your comment. So, if I understand this, you are blaming George Sodders for the problem with funding new schools? Therefore the kids will suffer, your property values will suffer. I understand the frustration of the voters, however, being part of the solution is to get behind a movement to get school funding corrected and don't stop until it is or a new state legislature is in place.



"If you can't feed them, DON'T breed them......
Others should not be paying for your kids.. It was YOUR decision to have them . It should be YOUR responsibility to provide for them.. Keep your irresponsibly procreating tax pandering hands out of my wallet.

That is all.

LOL my security words were. "hoodlum" and "setup"
Jackalope
2:29 PM, 5/7/2010"


Jackalope: thank you for your comment. I would like to thank those who helped to fund my education when I was in school in this district. I'm certain many people didn't have children, but they enjoy strong property values as a result of good schools and good education. I'm sure the kids I'm supporting, now that my kids are grown, educated and prospering as a result of a good education, will be productive if they can get the proper education.



"If I owned rental property in a school district with one of these unconstitutional levies on ballot, I would send a letter to all of my renters and let them know if it passes they would pay the cost of the tax increase on the property. Levies are based on the divide and conquer mentality. I talked to a renter that couldn't understand why a homeowner didn't want to pay additional tax for a new building. I say impose the tax on everyone then see if it passes. If it does then I would live with it.
dana
3:00 PM, 5/7/2010"


dana: thank you for your comment. Sir, the school funding system is unconstitutional not the levies. If you had rental property, it stands to reason that you should increase the rent on your rentals to cover the increase in taxes. That is common sense. Please understand that renters do pay for their taxes indirectly through their rent. If the landlord wishes to absorb the tax increase, that is his choice, not the fault of the children.



"I already deceided to vote no, but after reading all the comments now I no for sure my vote is NO. We would be crazy to vote for something that is going to raise our taxes that much,especially on my fixed income.
like the no votes
3:40 PM, 5/7/2010"


like the no votes: thank you for your comment. First, be glad you are on a fixed income. There are many who aren't. They work and earn a living, however, in this economy their jobs may very well be in jeopardy. I am a good example. My hours were cut in half, including my pay from September until April, yet I support this because I know what it will do for my property values, it is good for the education of kids, and personally, if I can't find $20 a month, then I have bigger problems. At least those on fixed incomes know their financial picture and can do what needs to be done if they truly support the educational system which effects your property values.




"until you can convince me that there is a link between a new building and improved education (smarter kids) or that an old building makes kids dumber I will vote NO.

It is the primary responsibilty of the Board to provide a fruitful learning environment for children not to improve property values, attract business etc. This can be done successfully in whatever building you have available. Make due with what you have.
dana
4:00 PM, 5/7/2010"


dana: Personally, sir, I don't think you would accept anyones reasons for a direct corralation between new schools and improved education for children. Between JC and myself, you've thrown many issues - many of which are unfounded, misinformed data and a complete unawareness of what is expected in today's market place. We no longer put lugnugs on trucks like we used to do. There are machines that do many of the jobs a person used to do. We live in a global market place that requires more than a 3-R education.