| 10/13/2009 11:44:04 AM | Stuck With Andrew | | Andrew references the voting on the "temporarary" levies to operate the schools. Funny how the temporary/emergency levies become renewal levies, then permanent levies. Typical game the schools have been running on the property tax payer for years. Not once has a temporary levy been used until it's time limit and has been allowed to expire. Andrew, we the taxpayer have been listening to the same old "we are making strides" nonsense since the early 80's. It is getting old and worn by now. We kept giving you people more money on the promise that the schools would get better. They haven't. We gave you new schools a few years ago with the promise that the elementary proficiency would get better. It hasn't. We don't think you, Tyus, McNeil and the others are smart enough to turn this school system around, especially since you have made no dramatic changes of your failed policies. It is a shame we had no new people to challenge your ineptness. Since we have had no indication that anything will change, we can expect more of the same poor performance from all of you on the board. | | 10/13/2009 1:24:30 PM | Marcia Andrew | To "Stuck with Andrew": Hiding behind an anonymous tagline really doesn't give you the right to be rude, right out of the blocks. The problems facing the schools are deep-rooted, and there are no easy answers. We are trying. You do not see the dramatic improvement you would like and jump to the conclusion that we must not be trying to improve.
As for the levies, we, like just about every other school district in Ohio, are forced to go with temporary levies because, if Middletown voters passed a permanent tax increase, the messed up state funding scheme would actually use that increased "local share" to decrease the state funding dollars provided. The result would be no more money for the schools, but more of it coming from your pocket, versus from the state (which is of course, also tax dollars, but shared more broadly). So, we would have increased the tax burden on local property owners, without increasing the money available to run the schools. Now, that would really be inept. | | 10/13/2009 3:49:55 PM | Jack Fate | Ms.Andrew--using a screen name is hardly hiding, as it is the message that matters. YOU might put too much weight in the egocentrist approach of stamping opinions with personality.
I didn't read anything overly rude, and thought the post was an accurate summary minus the politically correct syrup coating.
Since you are all that we have, we must wish you the best and pray that you have learned from your first term. Quit talking down to us if you want our support(and $$$). Often it is YOU(SCHOOL BOARD) who doesn't understand(or accept) the message coming from the public. Please heed the message at the ballot box concerning funding.
No one other than the School Board and Admin sees our test results/ratings as improving or satisfactory. We are tired of being on the bottom, and our entire community suffers for that reason. You MUST achieve results asap.
Face it--we over-built the new schools. They aren't full, and we didn't really need Miller Ridge without the annexation. We have spent too much $$, and still aren't anywhere near having a superintendant. We are in permanent limbo. Thanks for nothing! | | 10/14/2009 9:39:11 AM | Marcia Andrew | | Mr. Fate, was there anything in my interview or my post where you felt I was talking down to people? I don't think there was, so I really want to know if you feel differently. I don't think it is condescending to say that something is really complicated when it is, or to say that we on the school board know more about an issue that we have studied than the general public -- after all, we were elected to spend more time learning about the issues than most people have available for school issues. | | 10/14/2009 11:15:25 AM | Jack Fate | Ms.Andrew--you are obviously a well-educated and successful professional in a highly respected Cincy law firm(Taft,Stennius & Hollister?--I used them years ago in a labor dispute).
Your interview above is sensible and somewhat conciliatory. My "talking down" reference goes back to your MJ editorials of the past, where you lambast the citizens for failing to act accordingly and/or understand your version of their basic responsibilities to the school board and system. I found you extremely condescending.
Please remember that you are elected to serve the mandate of the citizens first and foremost. Our voice on election day is our message of how we want you to proceed in your position. Accept our choice and act accordingly without any need to "scold or chastise" us for not seeing things your way.
All of that said--you get another term. Please respect us and work with us to improve the academic situation(and a quick return to discipline-which should be a cornerstone in our next superintendant). We all need this system to improve and function. We are on the same team, like it or not(and by that, I mean ALL of us).
|
|
