Olmsted Falls Asks For Bailout Money! Why Not Lakewood?

[Bill Call]

It doesn't hurt to ask:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD94QQRLG0

Why pass a levy if we can get free money?

The Federal Government is printing money at a furious pace. We should all get our fair share before it's all gone. With the Lakewood school board handing out raises like Holloween candy the bailout cannot come fast enough.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
I thought this was an interesting quote from that article:

"I feel a moral obligation to our taxpayers to make this attempt," said Hoadley, who requested $100 million from the Treasury Department last week. "This is a legitimate request. I'll be frankly disappointed if something positive doesn't come out of this."

Mr. Hoadley is Olmsted Falls' Superintendent.

So, his request now sits at the top of the pile.

Why do you think Lakewood's elected and appointed staff do not share this feeling of moral obligation to the Lakewood taxpayers.

[michael gill]

This is just political grandstanding by a wealthy district full of people who want to live far from anyone unlike them, but don't want to pay for the schools that go along with building such a place. That's all.

[William Fraunfelder III]

Don,

I think Mr. Hoadley's request comes more from political grand-standing and a lack of fiscal morality concerning his obligation to ALL taxpayers. His obligations are to the citizens of Olmsted Falls. Given that the programs and construction projects he seeks to fund with TARP grants fall within already established funding sources (local, for levies, and state, for matching construction funds), he'd rather stiff everyone rather than ask his community to make the now, even-tougher decisions that others, such as Lakewood, have already committed to. It is my understanding that Olmsted Falls has voted-down the last two proposed levies. That alone provides a bit of impetus, as well as makes citizens of Olmsted Falls feel better about historically under-funding their kids' education.

If it were me, it would be immoral to even consider such a proposal. This does, however, crack open the door to numerous possibilities of alternative local school funding in this state that have been the subjects of previously-posted threads. Consider this time to be the opportunity to hatch a "New Deal" for educational funding; if not state-wide, what are our alternatives here?

[Charlie Page]

This ranks up there with the humorous story of the Cheesecake Factory seeking a bailout, except this one is true.

"I feel a moral obligation to our taxpayers to make this attempt," said Hoadley, who requested $100 million from the Treasury Department last week. "This is a legitimate request. I'll be frankly disappointed if something positive doesn't come out of this."

His moral obligation should be to the parents and students. His obligation to the taxpayers is to spend the money wisely and, hopefully, not look like a total fool in the process.

It’s a wonder he’s asking for more money on the heals of 7.7 million received from the state in March 2008 and passage of the May 2007 bond issue, which netted 17 million. All to alleviate the same overcrowding problem he’s complaining about again.

http://www.ofcs.k12.oh.us/docs/0-Busine ... Issue1.pdf

Now, there’s two great lessons for the students:

1) If you can’t live within your means don’t worry about cutting back, just stick your hand out and beg.
2) If your dad gives you $15 to buy that new CD this week, you can’t ask him for $15 to buy the same CD the next week. However, you can ask Grandma for $100.

Let the residents pony up and pay that tab or make the necessary cuts to balance the budget.