Levy Set For 3.9 Mill, McKinley To Be Liquidated - Possibly

[Jim O'Bryan]

Levy Set For 3.9 Mill, McKinley To Be Liquidated - Possibly

Superintendent Jeff Patterson will be asking the Board to start the process to put a 3.9 mill levy on the ballot this spring.

He will also be asking the Board to place McKinley Elementary up for possible sale soon.

The sale of McKinley will lead the Levy as it takes a little more of a process to get the Levy approved, voted on, approved by the state, and onto the ballot. "We could not wait any longer and still have any hope of getting it on the spring ballot," Patterson said. "This will help make up for the shortfall from the sate and taxes over recent years and should provide us with enough to look at some programs we dropped or other ideas." Jeff went on to explain, with a levy will come lots of expectations some deserved some not. "Our teachers and the union have been more than fair to us over recent years, and we appreciate that." However anyone would wonder how long the union can go without asking for something.

When I asked about a pending Bond issue Jeff honestly said, we will need another Bond Issue to finish the schools, and we have to finish the schools to get the 31% that is owed to us from the state-- roughly $50 million dollars. On top of the money to finish the schools, the State School Construction Committee will also ask to see at least 1% of the total cost added to the bond to help maintain them.

It seems to me a very cruel trick the State is playing with communities, as the State leads them off on these pathways that only pay MAYBE, based on a number that changes year-to-year. When I mentioned this to Superintendent Patterson he said, "Many communities cannot pass bond issues, so they will fall in ranking and we should rise up probably high enough that we will be on the list to be paid." I again mentioned it has to be tough to go back to the well, and hope the state picks us for the bill they owe and decided to pay, balance a levy, run the schools, and keep a smile. Patterson merely showed me a beaming smile.

Not to bore everyone with details, but the Superintendent and I went through many, many different ways to finance things, and discussed different ways levies could be structured. With each way, he could point out the good and bad in them, and he had looked at those and many, many more, in the end, the District will ask for a simple levy, not one that builds in stages, or one of the many other ways they can be put together. "Jim, this is the fairest way we can put a levy out there," Patterson said, "easy to understand, easy to implement, especially if we have done our job and the voters appreciate the hard work we have done to this point."

The sale of McKinley School will be more difficult and possibly more dire in its outcome. The school has recently been appraised at $1.7 million and while the Board looked at the possibility of tearing it down to get around state law they found out that it would only add to their bottom line, paying for the demolition and still having to offer it to any charter school in the community, or any charter school willing to come in and serve the community. In my opinion, this could be a disaster, not because of the competition, but the money that could be drained from the levy to help pay for kids going to the charter school.

As the school has not yet been stripped of asbestos, it will be costly for anyone to come in and purchase it.

If the school does not sell to any charter school for a fair asking price, it can then go out to bid and there seems to be some interest on that side. It is rumored that a couple developers have gone through it expressing an interest. One is Andrew Brickman from Abode Living (Eleven River and Clifton Pointe). When I spoke with Andrew last week as was reported earlier, he said, "It is an interesting piece of property and of course I have an interest in it, Lakewood is really coming together and has been good for Abode Living, but there is still much to discuss and look at."

All of this and more will be discussed at the School Board meeting January 22nd.


.

[Betsy Voinovich]

Jim said:

...the Superintendent and I went through many, many different ways to finance things, and discussed different ways levies could be structured. With each way, he could point out the good and bad in them, and he had looked at those and many, many more, in the end, the District will ask for a simple levy, not one that builds in stages, or one of the many other ways they can be put together. "Jim, this is the fairest way we can put a levy out there," Patterson said, "easy to understand, easy to implement, especially if we have done our job and the voters appreciate the hard work we have done to this point."

Hi Jim,

To help continue my education on levies (I'm still not as clear as I could be on HouseBill 920 but I'll address that in the other thread), can you tell me what a "simple levy" is? You say that Mr. Patterson said that it's the fairest way they can put it out there, easy to understand and implement.."

How does it work? I know the Cleveland School levy is a four year levy-- after four years the voters have to come back an approve it again, or it goes off. Is that a simple levy? Is a simple levy one that once approved, stays that way forever?

I like the sound of "fairest way, and easy to understand" but I'm not really sure what that means.

Thanks.

Betsy Voinovich

[Jim O'Bryan]

Betsy

Actually Steve Davis would be a better responder to this, as for the very nature of levies,
and how they affect the day to day running of the schools.

A simple example is that it could have been a graduated levy, 1 mill in the first year, 2 mill
in the second, 3 mill in the 3.... This actually makes sense as most levies are front weighted
so that the first year there is an excess, that becomes a negative by the final years as
cost of living goes up, salaries go up etc.

A straight levy is the schools think this should be fine for 5 - 8 years. So that 3.9 mill is
far easier to understand in overall cost to a family than any other scale that could be moved
around. Superintendent Patterson, who has been studying this since when I first hinted at it
in October, has decided this is the best and the least amount they can go with.

As I mentioned in another thread, many of us would have preferred to see a 9 mill levy
so that the schools could actually bring back more and offer more. Of course that would
have been a much larger target for the teacher's union to drive their request truck through.

The thought is anything over 6 mill is a killer.

.

[Scott Meeson]

I'm preparing and hoping to vote yes for all the required necessities of our schools:

Scott

[Bill Call]

However anyone would wonder how long the union can go without asking for something.

When did they ever go without? Does a 50% increase in insurance premiums, increases in pension contributions, 3% step raises and millions in retirement bonuses count?

Property taxes in Lakewood are reaching confiscitory levels. Soon declining values will fuel increases in property tax rates which will fuel declining property values which will fuel further rate increases...

$250,000 per classroom seems like enough money to teach kids to read.

[Scott Meeson]

However anyone would wonder how long the union can go without asking for something.

It caught my eye back in 2011 that union leadership was surprised by the 2 percent hike in base pay. It appears that they didn't ask for a raise, our board was generous enough to offer. (?)

http://www.cleveland.com/sunpostherald/index.ssf/2011/05/new_lakewood_teachers_contract.html

[Jim O'Bryan]

Bill

I forgot about making the deal with School Board member Matt Markling out of town. Where
for no reason the rest of the board gave in even after the Union had said no.

What was that all about.

No matter with a levy passed they too will come again.

But they have done this perfectly with new buildings, old buildings, and the future at stake.

I do not see where not supporting the levy gets us anywhere but, another election for the
levy that will then be paid for by the schools, and more money and time wasted.

.

[Scott Meeson]

Bill

I forgot about making the deal with School Board member Matt Markling out of town.

What was that all about..

Jim,
It would appear to be nothing more than the board transacting its normal business while a board member happens to be absent. Is there some other report/information that's in the public domain that would indicate otherwise?

Where
for no reason the rest of the board gave in even after the Union had said no.

There's no indication that the rest of the board "gave in" on anything... just appears to be an agreement that was respectful to both parties.


Scott Meeson