The Observation Deck

Just wondering.

In what way do you wonder if it's deceptive?

Bill, you are smart enough, and know this board enough, to understand that in order for us to answer we need a reference point for what you mean.

What, exactly, is the text and what do you think is deceptive about it?

Matthew Lee wrote:Bill, you are smart enough, and know this board enough, to understand that in order for us to answer we need a reference point for what you mean.

What, exactly, is the text and what do you think is deceptive about it?

Matthew, Bill is a smart guy and he knows what he's doing. He throws out a line and see if anyone snags it...that's his MO. I'm not saying that to deride him, it's just how he plays it. Like the local tv news that spends a third of the broadcast hour teasing you about what's coming up next.

However, I'm personally vested in this as I'm the treasurer of Citizens for Lakewood's Children (the ballot issue PAC that paid for the mailers - I didn't design them, I just paid the bill). If there's anything deceptive, I need to know.

Charlie Page wrote:However, I'm personally vested in this as I'm the treasurer of Citizens for Lakewood's Children (the ballot issue PAC that paid for the mailers - I didn't design them, I just paid the bill). If there's anything deceptive, I need to know.

The flier mentions $6 million in cuts in State funding but according to the five year forecast State and Federal and other funding totaled $18,778,251 in 2012 and will total about $18,000,000 in 2017. Since most of the decline is in Federal money where is the $6 million lost in State funding? Over what time period? One year? Two, Three?

The flier mentions all the things the new tax dollars will buy except the items that make up the biggest part of the budget: wages and benefits. Those two items will be $6.5 million greater in 2017 than 2013.

That said, there are a lot of good reason to vote for the levy: the teachers do a fine job and the administration does a good job in balancing various interests. While there are some good reasons to vote against the levy voting against the levy wouldn't do much to deal with those concerns.

Like most budgets, you have to be wary of how "cuts" is used. In other words, I give you $5 yearly and I project in 2015 I will give you $10. If I give you $5 again in 2015 that may be considered a 50% budget cut, even though the dollar amount is the same. That said, real cuts and cuts from projections both have significant impacts.

Bill Call wrote:The flier mentions $6 million in cuts in State funding but according to the five year forecast State and Federal and other funding totaled $18,778,251 in 2012 and will total about $18,000,000 in 2017. Since most of the decline is in Federal money where is the $6 million lost in State funding? Over what time period? One year? Two, Three?

The flier mentions all the things the new tax dollars will buy except the items that make up the biggest part of the budget: wages and benefits. Those two items will be $6.5 million greater in 2017 than 2013.

That said, there are a lot of good reason to vote for the levy: the teachers do a fine job and the administration does a good job in balancing various interests. While there are some good reasons to vote against the levy voting against the levy wouldn't do much to deal with those concerns.

If you recall when governor Kasich came into office back in 2011, Democrats left an 8 billion dollar hole in the state budget. Kasich chose to close that hole by reducing subsidies to cities and schools. From the Lakewood City Schools 5 year forecast, about 35% of revenues come from the State. Since the State of Ohio's fiscal year is July 1 - June 30, Kasich's budget cuts went into effect on July 1, 2011. So there is about two years of cuts from state revenues. Also, Ohio has been gradually phasing out the Tangible Personal Property tax. FY12 was the last year for any revenues from this. Per the 5 year forecast, this is about 2.8 million annually. This is where the 6 million in state cuts came from.

If the levy fails then the schools will need to make additional cuts over and above what was cut in the last year or two. This includes reducing the number of teachers. Superintendent Patterson has said this on a number of occasions. Teachers do earn salary and benefits. You have to conclude that if the levy passes, that some part of the levy dollars will go towards maintaining current classroom sizes, which means maintaining the number of teachers, which means paying salaries and benefits to the teachers that weren't cut.

I don't consider that deceptive.

I'll be back after a short recess.

Here is some summer reading:

http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsea ... yahoga.pdf