The Observation Deck

Jim O'Bryan wrote:. Chas Geiger has always been a class act.

I'm sure he has always been a class act.

He is also the architect of Lakewood schools fiscal train wreck. He squandered tens of millions of dollars on unaffordable wage and benefit increases because he lacked an ability to say no to the unions.

Lakewood schools are now set to increase salaries by another $18 million dollars PER YEAR.

In a few years property taxes will cost MORE than the mortgage. How much sense does that make?

Say yes to the future by saying no to the operating levy.

Operating levys go in cycles. After a levy passes, districts typically end up with loads of cash at the front end of the levy. This is called a surplus. These surpluses are needed to cover expenses in future years after the mid point of the levy is reached. The mid point is where expenses (cash outflows) are approximately equal to the revenue (cash inflows). After this mid point, cash outflows will be larger than cash inflows. When the surplus runs out, the district is SOL and must cut expenses and/or increase revenues via a levy. This is where we are today.

Lakewood has cut expenses and continues to cut expenses. Cutting anymore could affect the quality of education and will most likely affect the "excellent" rating by the State.

A vote against the levy is a vote against Lakewood's future. Don't hold the kids hostage in this battle. Vote YES!

Can anyone explain what affect closing Grant will have on existing programs such as “All Day Kindergarten”?

Welcome to the Deck Kevin,

I am not entirely sure how to answer your question, but to flip it and say what a big effect all day kindergarten has had on all of our schools. The enrollment of kindergartners have gone up and some contribute that to switching to an all day program. Now, some our arguing that if these numbers continue and we have a trend that going from 7 to 6 schools will put us in a position to not be able to service all of the our students & be excellent. I would agree. Which is why the argument for Grant is so compelling because it would offer the most flexibility & expansion opportunities if we do close a school and our numbers go up. Jan Soeder, the assistant superintendent, has said that if LCA were to close (although no on is saying that it is) that Lakewood Schools would NOT be able to service those kids. We are very close to being full now. If our enrollment is on a trend upward we are going to be in serious trouble if we close a school; bigger class sizes and crowding just being one of the results. Our community has said that the number 1 thing that is important in all of this in class size. People are saying it--not sure in the BOE is hearing it.

Kristine

When Lakewood decided to close some of its 10 elementary buildings, they effectively made the decision to eliminate the choice of walking to school on a daily basis for many students.

I agree. I live on St. Charles North of Detroit and so Grant is very close and we walk whenever we can. Even living so close there is no way that I will allow my 7 year old daughter walk to school alone, and if Grant were to close, there would be absolutely no way she would walk to Emerson or Lincoln.

Here is the thing. Ed Favre opened the Phase 3 Committee process by presenting us with some criteria. One of the criteria was that Lakewood remain a walking community because busing was a huge budget buster. That is why we've had all of these discussions about where the kids live and how to remain (or as close as possible) to a walking community. I am not certain that if we go to 6 that the State won't ever come back and say that we must bus. Who knows? I know 7 is better if this is a goal.

Kristine

Kristine Pagsuyoin wrote:Here is the thing. Ed Favre opened the Phase 3 Committee process by presenting us with some criteria. One of the criteria was that Lakewood remain a walking community because busing was a huge budget buster. That is why we've had all of these discussions about where the kids live and how to remain (or as close as possible) to a walking community. I am not certain that if we go to 6 that the State won't ever come back and say that we must bus. Who knows? I know 7 is better if this is a goal.
Kristine

Kristine

Never went to a meeting, have only heard rumors, and what is on their site but...

What is the single biggest reason something has to be done NOW!

It would seem that it could be years for us to see any of the money if ever that was promised by those
running the 50-year committee. Seems like the whole deal should have been done differently. One big levy?
Better agreement with state to pay for each school as it happened. Whatever just another
mistake, time to move on.

But it now seems, that it went from ONLY 6 schools, to "will only pay for 6" a very big difference. I have been
told by one board member massive plans for an 8 story building on Kaufman Park, and now Linda mentions
a huge rec center. Are there immediate plans for this property? Can't it even be marketed for years if ever?

Are family trends growing in Lakewood as they are in other communities? Can we wait for the census?

Would it make more sense, to just shoot for 6, keep Lincoln nearly the same with retro fit AC, and cabeling/
A Emerson/Horace Mann lite? That way it can stay the beautiful little school on Clifton. Children heading to Horace Mann and Emerson during the rebuild. Grant reopens the modular trailers and take in some students
from Roosevelt while that is repaired, then after the state pays. WE rethink Grant and if we use some
of the refunded state money on it, or not.

One thing that has bothered me since day one, that it placed to one section of the city against each other yet
again in some perverse contest over who WINS. No one wins in this BS. This is the way things were decided in
school, not how they should be decided about schools!

So what are the very pressing issues that demand this decision Tuesday?

Or can we finish the high school, rethink the three schools and proceed with a plan?

FWIW

Jim, I agree I don't understand the rush to decide which school to close, especially when it's been said more than once that nothing will close for a few years. Or is the board going back on that too? Is this perhaps a repeat of the Franklin scenario? The residents voiced concerns over rumors of what would be put their (Lakewood Academy) and they were told by the board "we have no immediate plans" and of course as soon as the school closed surprise Lakewood Academy was there. They were also given only a few months notice of the closing, which was the opposite of what happened when Garfield and Madison closed with over a year notice. Both Lincoln and Grant are rated excellent, the only two elementary schools to be rated such, so why not hold off for a bit, the state of the buildings doesn't seem to be hampering education.

And I also agree let's get the high school finished. Let's see what happens with our population especially in light of the 100 extra kindergarden students we received this year. The sites of the 7 elementary schools best serve this community and it's population. Do we really need to go down to 6 crowded schools? Is that what the community wants for it's school children? What would then become of our excellent rated district?

Patience is a virtue. Why not wait on a decision, come together as a community and get this levy passed and then move on to the next bond issue and finish the high school and see what happens with our population.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Kristine Pagsuyoin wrote:Here is the thing. Ed Favre opened the Phase 3 Committee process by presenting us with some criteria. One of the criteria was that Lakewood remain a walking community because busing was a huge budget buster. That is why we've had all of these discussions about where the kids live and how to remain (or as close as possible) to a walking community. I am not certain that if we go to 6 that the State won't ever come back and say that we must bus. Who knows? I know 7 is better if this is a goal.
Kristine

Kristine

Never went to a meeting, have only heard rumors, and what is on their site but...

What is the single biggest reason something has to be done NOW!

It would seem that it could be years for us to see any of the money if ever that was promised by those
running the 50-year committee. Seems like the whole deal should have been done differently. One big levy?
Better agreement with state to pay for each school as it happened. Whatever just another
mistake, time to move on.

But it now seems, that it went from ONLY 6 schools, to "will only pay for 6" a very big difference. I have been
told by one board member massive plans for an 8 story building on Kaufman Park, and now Linda mentions
a huge rec center. Are there immediate plans for this property? Can't it even be marketed for years if ever?

Are family trends growing in Lakewood as they are in other communities? Can we wait for the census?

Would it make more sense, to just shoot for 6, keep Lincoln nearly the same with retro fit AC, and cabeling/
A Emerson/Horace Mann lite? That way it can stay the beautiful little school on Clifton. Children heading to Horace Mann and Emerson during the rebuild. Grant reopens the modular trailers and take in some students
from Roosevelt while that is repaired, then after the state pays. WE rethink Grant and if we use some
of the refunded state money on it, or not.

One thing that has bothered me since day one, that it placed to one section of the city against each other yet
again in some perverse contest over who WINS. No one wins in this BS. This is the way things were decided in
school, not how they should be decided about schools!

So what are the very pressing issues that demand this decision Tuesday?

Or can we finish the high school, rethink the three schools and proceed with a plan?

FWIW

Hey Jim,

When you're saying up there, "just shoot for six" do you mean, "just shoot for seven"?
It's been a long day, I think I like what you're saying, I think you're saying, "let's just keep the seven we have" which, given our current rising enrollment, seems like it's only sane. I love (I mean I think I love) what you're saying about waiting for the census. That only makes sense.
can you clarify?
thank you ...


Betsy Voinovich

Betsy

What I am saying is "We were told the state would pay for six. Now for one reason or another that
might not have been 100% true. No matter, we keep our end of the deal. Get paid for
6 keep 7 open.

The deal was NEVER ONLY 6 schools. It was that the state would only pay for 6 schools.
Everything else is just utter BS at this point.

FIRST - Finish the high school.

Second we fix Roosevelt, the school in the worst shape, using Grant for some
of the overflow. Re-open the shut down modular units. Make Grant, Grant again.

Third we update Lincoln, to modern standards, no major rebuild. Air conditioning, new wiring,
technology, etc. A nice small nice looking old school, ala Garfield, Horace Mann, Emerson.

We apply for our $$$$$$, IF we even get them, we then can use them for fixing up Grant, whatever,
by then we have an actual plan for the schools, and know if there is any way to even move the property,
build that massive new rec center, or place it at Kaufman Park, if the Cleveland Clinic never rents
the huge 8 story all glass building right next to Taco Bell and Quaker Steak and Lube.

This tearing the city apart in a contest of guesswork and theater is absurd.

Well it seems absurd to hurry into the great unknown, where are the plans?

How on earth did we get here anyway. WE were told if we raised the money
40% was coming back to us. Who put that out there, who headed that up?

Whatever, vote for the levy, finish the school, and lets all calm down.


.

Danielle Masters wrote:Jim, I agree I don't understand the rush to decide which school to close, especially when it's been said more than once that nothing will close for a few years. Or is the board going back on that too? Is this perhaps a repeat of the Franklin scenario? The residents voiced concerns over rumors of what would be put their (Lakewood Academy) and they were told by the board "we have no immediate plans" and of course as soon as the school closed surprise Lakewood Academy was there. They were also given only a few months notice of the closing, which was the opposite of what happened when Garfield and Madison closed with over a year notice. Both Lincoln and Grant are rated excellent, the only two elementary schools to be rated such, so why not hold off for a bit, the state of the buildings doesn't seem to be hampering education.

And I also agree let's get the high school finished. Let's see what happens with our population especially in light of the 100 extra kindergarden students we received this year. The sites of the 7 elementary schools best serve this community and it's population. Do we really need to go down to 6 crowded schools? Is that what the community wants for it's school children? What would then become of our excellent rated district?

Patience is a virtue. Why not wait on a decision, come together as a community and get this levy passed and then move on to the next bond issue and finish the high school and see what happens with our population.

Danielle,
I think you missed the board meeting at Grant in November. Mr. Madak made it clear that he wasn't going to make any promises on how soon the school would be closed. Budget uncertainty was sited. I could easily see them closing Grant and extracting the final 2.6 million in budget cuts they are looking for (even if the levy passes) out of the hides of the students and staff at Grant. I find it odd that the additional 2.6 in budget cuts are continually mentioned but no details on where they will be coming from?

Basically the reason the decision needs to be made ASAP is to help pass the up coming levy. Making it official that Lincoln is the chosen untouchable school will secure the votes for the levy from the Lincoln community. While they will use the threat of an end of the school year closing date to get the support of the Grant community. As long as it remains undecided they won't be able to use these tools for leverage to get the votes.

Bill

Throughout the Phase III process I struggled to understand the urgency of making this decision. I felt we should take the time necessary to gather information and thoroughly consider the options. Others felt that the commitment to deliver a recommendation/report to the Board by October was more important. Unlike Phases I & II, there is much less room for error…no Phase IV to correct our course or accommodate unexpected changes, like our economy and/or enrollment increase. I did suggest that we revise our master facilities plan by splitting the LHS East renovation from the elementary school decision. Who wouldn’t vote for a bond issue to finish that job? I was told that we risked losing state funding but I am not convinced.

Anyway, a group of concerned citizens, myself included, are trying to reach others who have taken an interest in this issue. We encourage you, whether you have students in the district or not, to ATTEND THE MEETING or CONTACT BOARD MEMBERS with your thoughts, concerns and questions.

Please see the attached flyer for more information.

http://media.lakewoodobserver.com/media/docs_1266192704.pdf

Bill, I did miss that meeting. Unfortunately I had a child and my mom in the hospital and I was out of the loop for a few weeks. This whole situation just makes me shake my head and I'll leave it at that.

Meg, thanks for posting the flyer.

Well, the first day of Phase 3, Mr. Favre wrote, "Walkability," on the board. He said that was the goal, that Lakewood wasn't going to pay for buses. The district needed to remain walkable. When you go from 10 to 6 schools, he said, where those schools are becomes important. You have to do it right.

If you take away the central school, and the class sizes get too big, Lakewood's not walkable anymore. The border of the central school touches the border of all the other five schools. They are essentially in a circle around it, some closer some further. If the class sizes at Harrison go over 30 kids a class in some classes, but the only other school that has space is Horace Mann, that's not walkable. So, take some kids from Lincoln and send them to Horace Mann, now send some kids from Emerson to Lincoln, so kids from Harrison can go to Emerson. We've disrupted the educational process in 4 schools now. That is if we take the desires of the citizens of Lakewood seriously, when they say they want equitable class sizes. Moving kids around like that is absurd. More likely they'll just keep the classes stuffed full of kids. Or tell them they HAVE to go to Horace Mann from Harrison. Then they can complain to the state of OHio and the state can demand that the city of Lakewood pay for transportation because the State dictates that over two miles is "not walkable." Buses cost a lot. We don't have the money, and we don't need the money if the schools are in the right places, as Mr. Favre said.

With a large flexible central school, whenever one of the surrounding schools is full, the excess students can go to the central school. If that school is full (though if we built it BIGGER, as Jan Soeder advocates, so we get some "wiggle room" this school would likely have space. And if Lakewood's enrollment swelled with the new baby boom that everybody's talking about: the grandchildren of the baby boomers! the central school could expand further, using the historic original Grant school building, which is where the Board of Education is situated right now. The District owns a lot of land right in the center of town) but if that school is full, the central school can send students to any other school in the five surrounding schools which have room, to make space, and in each case, that distance is walkable, at least by the state of Ohio's standards. Now three schools are disturbed, but not five, or six. It is the only scenario that makes sense if you have only six schools. And if we go down to five schools, it makes even more sense.

Closing the wrong school in such tight economic times, with such uncertainty about enrollment, would be much more damaging to the future of Lakewood's schools and families than the failure of one levy. Though, I of course am not advocating that we not vote for the levy. Those of us who got involved in Phase 3 got involved because we support the schools, and, because in many cases, like mine, our children have had a great experience in the school district thus far.

Betsy Voinovich

Jim, I'm confused by references to marketing the Grant site.

The school board is prohibited by law against selling school properties.

In any case, Lincoln does not meet state requirements for green space and parking and it is beyond logic to imagine that its footprint can be expanded. There simply isn't enough money to acquire enough properties to make the school compliant with state requirements.

Lincoln would be demolished and rebuilt, but it still couldn't squeeze in all of the children it needs to serve. I didn't think that building a new Lincoln school was part of the recommendations made by the state.

I believe in and support the levy but I have a difficult time believing in the decision-making process of the school board. This would be a good time to remember that Gordon Brumm strongly advocated classes in logical thinking.

We know children who have had exceptional educational opportunities at both schools and we'd hate to lose any of that excellence. We have no children, so we don't have that kind of connection to the process, but it seems kind of embarrassing.

There are ways to sell Grant without selling it.

Make it a charter school, charter school fails, they sell it. I'm sure there are more ways and I'm sure a plan is hatched for this proverbial golden egg.

Why do I feel that this is just another scheme hatched by the same group of "gifted" that brought us "The West End" project that failed. The Cliffs that failed. Drug Mart Plaza that failed and Rosewood Center that failed.

sharon kinsella wrote:There are ways to sell Grant without selling it.

Make it a charter school, charter school fails, they sell it. I'm sure there are more ways and I'm sure a plan is hatched for this proverbial golden egg.

Why do I feel that this is just another scheme hatched by the same group of "gifted" that brought us "The West End" project that failed. The Cliffs that failed. Drug Mart Plaza that failed and Rosewood Center that failed.

Sharon

Rosewood was done by Tom Barrett, had nothing to do with any group. I work with Tom,
and he did exactly what was said, under brudget, and now it only has one spot left.

I believe that you are referring to "Rockport" *

which LakewoodAlive had nothing to do with but has oddly shown up on their list of
accomplishments. Possibly because it was never finished so it looks like The Cliffs.
Or at least was listed as such on their website for some time with a very small disclaimer
which disappeared at the bottom. *projects we would have approved of, I think it was just
under the skate park, and the lunar landing.


DL

At some point we are going to have to do something with McKinley, Taft, and now possibly
Grant. Are we just going to let them melt into the ground? I mean the 50-Year-Committee
certainly had a plan for all of the empty buildings.

Oh they didn't?

So they really never had an iron clad guarantee on reimbursement, and no plan for the
empty buildings?!

Who was running that committee, Who was running this one?

Has anyone in this city ever heard of the term "plan"?

If I was not so dedicated to Lakewood's statement on schools, I would really have to wonder
about truting this group with anything. What next double salaries for some administrators?

Who planned for this to blow up into insanity during the levy?

Oh there is that pesky word plan again.



Steve Davis

I know you are a huge fan of city managers, Do they have school board managers?


* Ned Hill who you might remember from the WestEnd, and comes out of the CSU Levin
College where the School Board was able to find the Dr to speak about the need to close
so many schools in "Lakeview" has recently been in Phoenix explaining to them how he
has turned Lakewood around by turning car dealerships into beautiful housing. I like
talking with Ned, but damn dude.


.