The Observation Deck

Will Brown wrote:...and change will come only when it is forced on us.

Or forced by us.

Bill

There is new blood and he has shed some light on his own views. Which in no way reflect the views of the school board.

I would invite other members to step into the light of day. The city has given you everything you need. How about a little face time in the community owned forum?

What could have happened about three months ago?

Election?




peace/....

Michael Ball wrote:Its in my opinion that Dr Estrop is waving the white flag and that for the betterment of his career he will move on to another job and leave Lakewood holding the bag sort of speak with a needed upcoming operating levy and a phase 3 construction levy. We as a district, according to the 5 year forecast provided by the administration show’s a

-$1,287,698.00 in 2008
-$7,005,156.00 in 2009
-$10,194,087.00 in 2010
-$13,346,672.00 in 2011
-$16,527,919.00 in 2012.

As you can see there is a lot of work in front of us. Yes those are negative numbers!

Yes, and here are some other districts 5 yr forecasts:

Rocky River -$14 million in 2012
Parma -$30 million in 2012
Euclid -$47 million in 2012
Medina -$17 million in 2012
Brunswick -$22 million in 2012

A random click on Google showed this gem:

Hilliard schools (near Columbus) -$111 million in 2012!! At that point I got tired clicking. 5 yr forecasts are required by law and cannot assume any tax increases. The only districts that dont show large out-year deficits are those that recently passed increases. Mr Markling, am I mistaken or lying? Other board members? Mr Warren?

I would urge those who woke up last night and suddenly discovered school financing to look further into the realities of how the 5-year forecasts work. The cities that DONT show large deficits in 2012 are those that have recenlty passed school levies.

Mr OBryan your post is most amazing of all. Your the one who constantly looks for ways to positively compare Lakewood to other cities and provides rationalization for any unfortunate occurrence,. yet you couldnt be bothered to check the above facts, which are available with three mouse clicks? You were so willing to defend every aspect of the George mayoral adminsitration while it really did leave this city with a royal mess but now wnat to join in the lynch job of school management because of ONE COMMENT by the superindent? These numbers out of context make Lakewood look like a basket case and YOU are ready to go right along with it. I truly am shocked. I will wait for the flame response I know is sure to follow from you but on this one its facts not ego that are on my side.

Dee Martinez wrote: Mr OBryan your post is most amazing of all. Your the one who constantly looks for ways to positively compare Lakewood to other cities and provides rationalization for any unfortunate occurrence,. yet you couldnt be bothered to check the above facts, which are available with three mouse clicks? You were so willing to defend every aspect of the George mayoral adminsitration while it really did leave this city with a royal mess but now wnat to join in the lynch job of school management because of ONE COMMENT by the superindent? These numbers out of context make Lakewood look like a basket case and YOU are ready to go right along with it. I truly am shocked. I will wait for the flame response I know is sure to follow from you but on this one its facts not ego that are on my side.

Dee


Maybe it is possible that I learned my lesson, and will not let it happen again.


.

Dee,

I understand how a 5 year forecast works and didn’t want to write a book to inform others how. I was just using it as a part of my opinion statement. I really do not care what other cities are doing around Lakewood. I only pay taxes in Lakewood and that’s all we need to be discussing here. Lakewood. Dee you sound like the last mayor administration, it might be bad in Lakewood but its worse in Cleveland Heights or Cleveland etc... . That’s the kind of mentality that got the city in a 3.5 mil deficit! Lakewood schools continue to spend more that it takes in. It’s a fact stated in that 5 year forecast. They continue to come back to the citizens to pay more in the way of taxes.

There needs to be leadership on the school board to take this district and lead it to become a financially sound district. That’s going to take this board to make tough decisions, maybe not the most supported decisions in order to keep expenditures below revenue. Economics 101.

So if you want to argue that other districts are missed managed worse or the same as Lakewood’s. That, in it self tells you the story about public elected officials running all types of governments in to deficits and relying on the already strapped citizen to pay higher taxes. If we do not vote for a levy, schools take away Busing, Music, art classes, everything that hurts students and their parents for not voting to continue the miss management and start being smart with the money we already pay in the way of taxes.

Dee I have also read a lot of your posts and find you could find fault in every post people make. I am all for a good political debate. I believe the discussion and arguing different view points is a good and healthy. It shows people care.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Dee Martinez wrote: Mr OBryan your post is most amazing of all. Your the one who constantly looks for ways to positively compare Lakewood to other cities and provides rationalization for any unfortunate occurrence,. yet you couldnt be bothered to check the above facts, which are available with three mouse clicks? You were so willing to defend every aspect of the George mayoral adminsitration while it really did leave this city with a royal mess but now wnat to join in the lynch job of school management because of ONE COMMENT by the superindent? These numbers out of context make Lakewood look like a basket case and YOU are ready to go right along with it. I truly am shocked. I will wait for the flame response I know is sure to follow from you but on this one its facts not ego that are on my side.

Dee


Maybe it is possible that I learned my lesson, and will not let it happen again.


.

Then how do you explain that virtually every other district in Ohio is showing similar or worse deficits than Lakewood?
Mr Ball doesnt want to "write a book" but merely wants to hit and run without putting numbers in context.
There is disingenuosness, ommission, and flatout lying and I suggest that Mr Ball and others are somewhere between 2 and 3. If you KNOW that large outyear defiicts are almost preordained in Ohios 5 yr forecast requirement wouldnt good faith require you to put that fact IN BIG BOLD LETTERS.
Even the ODES OWN WEBSITE adds that disclaimer!!!!!!!!!!!!! Try it yourself if you dont belive me.
I believe there are good dedicated and committed people in the Lakewood schools, people who care about doing their jobs right whether or not they have a Lakewood mailing address. It just burns me to no end when I see instant experts calling their work into question.
The numbers tell the story, if you let them.

Dee Martinez wrote:...You were so willing to defend every aspect of the George mayoral adminsitration while it really did leave this city with a royal mess but now wnat to join in the lynch job of school management because of ONE COMMENT by the superindent?

Dee


Maybe it is possible that I learned my lesson, and will not let it happen again.


There, to clarify.


.

From the Ohio Department of Education's own website. Youll see this when you try to check out a 5 yr forecast:

Warning!

The following factors may affect conclusions drawn about a school district’s fiscal condition:

* The notes to the “Financial Forecastâ€￾ are crucial to understanding the meaning of the numbers contained in a financial forecast.

* Projections are based upon a school district’s best knowledge of conditions at the time the forecast is transmitted to the state. Since the factors contained in the forecasts are subject to change, the forecast may vary significantly in the future based upon changing conditions.

* Only the district’s General Fund and DPIA Fund are contained in this forecast. All other funds are excluded.

Please call the school District Treasurer/Chief Fiscal Officer with your questions since they are the best qualified to explain the information contained on the following financial forecasts.

Part of the "book" that others are too busy to write.
But dang! I did it again. I swore I was out of this. Beebe, Gieiger, Shaughnessy, Favre, (and to a limited case)Markling be aware. If you cant be bothered to make the case for your own management Ill sit out the next vote. Bye!

I was thinking about the resignation of Dr.Estrop effective this summer and who could replace him.

What if the job was offered to Dr.Wagner of LHS?

With the hiring of Mr.Lanning and Mr.McNichols last year (my senior year) one of them or the other qualified house principals could step in as principal of the school, while Dr.Wagner takes the Superintendent's job.

Keep it in the system.

Dr.Wagner is very well respected among the students and faculty, as are the other principals. The high school would not lose too much because like I said, all of the other principals are very capable.

And at the same time, Dr.Wagner, I think, would do a great job with running our whole district.

I know he's going to chop me in two for mentioning this like he did five cinderblocks at our freshman orientation, but I have the utmost respect for him and the other principals within the school. I think they all are very capable of filling the roles.

I can already see the phone call coming in.
"Ivor, what are you thinking!"

How about Mrs. Donnelly for principal? I'd go back to high school immediately if she became the principal there!

Ivor Karabatkovic wrote: What if the job was offered to Dr.Wagner of LHS?

How about Mrs. Donnelly for principal? I'd go back to high school immediately if she became the principal there!

Ivor

Both are great ideas, offer the buy out paying until other work is found, or without him working and getting full pay. Move Dr. Wagner down and Mrs. Donnelly over.

However, the idea is to graduate the students, not attract them back until they have their teaching credentials.


.

I would think Dr Wagner would be a very serious and credible candidate to become superintendent. He certainly has the support of most people with any connection to LHS. He is one of the best examples of the school of "Management By Walking Around" Would he want a 100% desk job?

Dee said:

Mr. Ball doesn’t want to "write a book" but merely wants to hit and run without putting numbers in context.
There is disingenuousness, omission, and flat-out lying and I suggest that Mr. Ball and others are somewhere between 2 and 3. If you KNOW that large outyear defiicts are almost preordained in Ohios 5 yr forecast requirement wouldnt good faith require you to put that fact IN BIG BOLD LETTERS.


Dee,

Lying is a strong accusation to make! Since you say I am lying about the projected deficits facing this district. What are the real numbers then, so you are saying that by law we have to show a deficit?? So is it your belief we are not in a deficit situation over the next 3 years?? My comment in an earlier post states my case you find fault in ever post.
You cannot spend more than you make. That was my opinion earlier tonight and by the 5 year forecast you can see that as revenue decreases and expenditures increasing to a point that puts us in a deficit situation over the next few years. That’s a fact. This forecast is not far from the truth. People take time and ask the treasures office for a copy of the 5 yr forecast or get it on line from the state of Ohio. Ask the administration how close those projections are. You don’t have to believe what I say is the truth, check for your self.

Can we all at least agree spending more than you make is not a good way to run a school district. If anyone else would like to have a conversation on this issue I look forward your discussions

Dee published in her past few posts:

Here are some other districts 5 yr forecasts:

Rocky River -$14 million in 2012
Parma -$30 million in 2012
Euclid -$47 million in 2012
Medina -$17 million in 2012
Brunswick -$22 million in 2012

AND

Projections are based upon a school district’s best knowledge of conditions at the time the forecast is transmitted to the state. Since the factors contained in the forecasts are subject to change, the forecast may vary significantly in the future based upon changing conditions.

Based on the above from the ODE, projections are based upon a school districts best knowledge of conditions. Dee, does that mean you feel the treasures’ for all those school districts you listed above published invalid information? A 5 year forecast is just that, a forecast. It cannot possibly be exact due to a number of reasons; I think we all agree on that. But is our forecast that much off? $16 MM? Do you really believe that? Maybe one of our board members can sound in here and let us know what they think of the 5 year forecast. I asked the treasurer myself and he said he felt the numbers were as correct as he possibly could make them.

I guess we should all know soon. Parma, a school you mentioned above, rejected two separate levies last week, one being an emergency requirement. According to the Plain Dealer (Feb 18th 2008 section B page 3) Parma would not be able to maintain all current programs without passing the levy.

And while I did not do any research myself (on Strongsville), friends of mine in Strongsville told me their levy failed last year and they had to make cuts and freeze teacher raises. Dee, I believe that forecasts can be manipulated any way the preparer wants, but only to a certain extent. 80% of the school budget is made up of Salary, Health Care and Pension. Those numbers are much easier to predict over a 5 year period because they all center on the number of teachers employed. And we know who is scheduled to retire and track student enrollment. I also have found Rick Berdine to be open and forth coming in all my requests of information from him. I trust Rick Berdine and I do not believe any of our school board members would knowingly allow the publication of false information.

Why does it seem that the other thread about the payment of teachers is coming over to this thread?

Anyways,

Dee:

See, we can agree on something!

You bring up a great point about Dr.Wagner maybe not wanting a 100% desk job. But what if he redefines that position and is not only sitting in the office, but also going around the schools, seeing how things are going, making notes and overseeing how building procedures are being enforced?

Now that I think about it, he's very happy to be the principal at Lakewood at the moment and the students and faculty are happy to have him as well.

But a credible candidate indeed. Worth exploring!

Michael Ball wrote:Dee said:


Lying is a strong accusation to make!

You bet it is.
Statistics without context is at best half-truth. Thats somewhere between ommisssion and lying.
If I tell someone who was just released after 10 yrs in prison that I paid $2.50 for a gallon of gasoline and he tells me I was ripped off, dont I have a responsibility to the truth to tell him that the going price is $3.40? Or do I just let him think what I want him to think?
Allowing people to come to a conclusion based on numbers while deliberately withholding the context may not be textbook "lying" but reasonable people would probably agree its only a tick or two short.
You provided the numbers. I provided the context. The ODE website offers both. Everyone is free to check it out.
But while you believe your statistics closed your case, you completely waved off my context. I will leave it to our school leaders to continue this argument if they care enough to do so.

Good point about the Estrop contract. I'm wondering when we will hear something from the members of the School Board. I'm curious about what the state of school affairs is.
As far as a additional levy, I recall the School Board members & Mr. Estrop pleading with City Council to refrain from placing a city levy on the last levy balot. The feeling was, it was going to be tough getting the school levy passed. At the time we had increases in energy costs & a increase in property taxes. Now we continue to see additional energy increases & consumer goods price increases as well. We also continue to see the value of our homes decrease. I'll guess any additional levy increases will be voted down. What effect will that have?