The Observation Deck

After seeing Colleen Wing at Lakewood Court yesterday (I have no idea why she was there) it struck me that we have two people running for office with kids in private school.

Both Colleen Wing and Ed Fitzgerald (mayoral candidate and present at-large-council person) have their kids in private school.

While I would argue for anyone's right to educate your children the way you see fit, it just seems odd that people who want to grow Lakewood don't even support our public schools by attending them.

I am not a supporter of either of these candidates. I live in Ward 2 and will be proudly voting for Tom George.

However, I find your comments questionable. I spent most of my life in private education (largely since I grew up in Cleveland). HOwever, I am very concerned about Lakewood schools. I have supported the recent levies, attended functions and even take time to cover their sports for the paper. I also know that many of my fellow private school alums, including many former and current council members, care very much about Lakewood schools and public education in general.

There are many of us who are childless, have grown children or kids in private schools that care very much about Lakewood schools.

Great post Mike!

Mike -

I went to St. James for grade school and St. Augustine for high school.

Great schools. My parents weren't in public office.

They were, however in unions and we tried to support union business.

Question me if you want, I find it odd.

Also, I see you qualified your statement by saying that your private school experience was mostly due to living in Cleveland. Nothing wrong with that.

Lakewood schools are great schools. Lakewood is a great place to live. As someone who loves Lakewood and tries to support Lakewood, whenever possible I shop in Lakewood. I support community events in Lakewood. I do political work in Lakewood. By the way, two of my kids went to Lakewood schools and had a wonderful education. Lakewood schools, in my opinion are among the best around. My oldest boy went to N. Olmsted. I was fine, but definitely not up to Lakewood standards.

Sharon,

I can't speak for them but, Did you ever think that maybe they are Catholic and want to sent their children to private school for that reason. If I could afford to send my children to Catholic schools I would love to. I would love to have them learning in that environment. I then wouldn't have to take them every Monday night to PSR classes either. But reality is I have 5 children that will be going threw school and just physically can't afford to send them there. It is each individual persons right to choose where they send their children to school. It doesn't necessarily mean that they don't support Lakewood schools.

I didn't say it wasn't each persons right to do so. Look back at my post, I said it was.

I still find it odd.

That's me, not you.

5 kids - you're days are full I bet!

Sharon,
It appears you are saying Lakewood residents who send their children to Catholic schools are not supportive of the Lakewood public school system. Do I understand you correctly?

Sharon,

Read between the lines if you so choose to...I was making a statement of everyone having the choice of where they send their children, And that it doesn't mean they don't support Lakewood schools. I didn't state that you said that people don't have the right to choose.

Quite frankly I find your whole post odd.

What difference does it make!

But as you say... that's me not you!

Frank - that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that politicians that want to promote Lakewood and don't support lakewood schools by sending their children there is odd.

Like I said in my post, my parents were union people and supported union shops.

That's all - no deeper than that - no hidden means or undertones. What I say is what I mean. I find it odd.

When a person is promotiing a city to others and says "We have a fine community here and great schools" and is asked "Where do your kids go to school" in that kind of way odd - that's all.

Ironically, Sharon is parroting a classic tactic of union-bashing Republicans.

GOP hacks love to badmouth Democratic politicians who send their kids to private schools. Chelsea Clinton was frequently worked over by the righties.....the GOP, whose eventual goal is to privatize all government functions (Blackwater, anyone?) wants to push its disastrous "school voucher" agenda, which would take money from public schools and give it to private schools.

As both a taxpayer and private school alum, I am 100% opposed to these vouchers.

Mike -

While I'm sure that you think your observation is astute, let me point out a few things to you.

1. I didn't bash. Believe me Mike, when I bash it's very, very confrontational and I don't do that when I'm just making observations.

2. Do not ever compare me to a republican, I walk the walk mister. I don't talk the talk.

3. Saying that I find something odd does not mean that I condemn, it does not mean that I am criticising (well maybe in a small way). But I'm really saying I FIND IT ODD. (that's a period).

If you want to twist my words remember you're in print on here too!

I always know that I am.

Mike Deneen wrote:Ironically, Sharon is parroting a classic tactic of union-bashing Republicans.

GOP hacks love to badmouth Democratic politicians who send their kids to private schools. Chelsea Clinton was frequently worked over by the righties.....the GOP, whose eventual goal is to privatize all government functions (Blackwater, anyone?) wants to push its disastrous "school voucher" agenda, which would take money from public schools and give it to private schools.

As both a taxpayer and private school alum, I am 100% opposed to these vouchers.

Bush wanted to give $1,500 vouchers to low income families who had kids in failing schools. Most poor families do not have that luxury of a school choice.

Interesting point and even more interesting responses! I think Sharon brought up something to think about and didn't think she made much about their lack of support of the schools in terms of anything BUT attendance. She didn't say they "didn't support school levies" or some such. They simply don't support the schools by having their kids attend them. Works for me and, while not a huge point for or against a candidate it is an interesting look into their thoughts on the city.

What would be other, non-kid, choices that a person might make that could be of interest to voters?

Examples:

1) In a city touted as "walkable" how many of our politicians walk or take the bus to work?

2) What kind of recreational amenities do you enjoy? Are they ones from Lakewood Rec, Adult Education, Library, or Lakewood YMCA or are you getting into more fun stuff out of the City?

3) Where do you like to shop? Go out to eat?

These aren't deal breakers but why not ask? These people have to SELL Lakewood to its residents as well as to those who look at us from the outside. If a person drives to work a few blocks while touting the walkability of our city, does it matter? To some, no, but to others who make an effort to bike, even out of Lakewood, maybe it does. Deal breaker? Hardly. Tie breaker? Maybe!

This is meatier and more relevant than many big league political posturing. We have politicians who say they "Support the Institution of marriage" who have multiple divorces and say that "No Child Left Behind" is the best thing for education but quietly send their kids to private schools where NCLB can't follow. This is real stuff. I am glad to know how our representatives view our city and experience it. Do they do so like I do? How can that NOT be relevant?

As Dennis Miller once joked many years ago (before he sold out and became a Right Wing Tool)......"$1,500.....so how are they gonna pay for the second month, George?" (Bush 41 was president at the time)

Vouchers are a trojan horse designed to kill public education.

Phil,

I find your question much more telling than I do Sharon's.

I consider the Lakewood Catholic Schools a viable option for Lakewood families. Actually there are many people that send their children to schools outside the city - St. Joes, Mags. St. Ignatius etc. that doesn't make them less committed to Lakewood. Lots of these people have family histories that date back at these institutions. Lakewood is enriched by having the Catholic Academy and St. Ed's right here in town. I'm not Catholic - but sending your child to a Catholic or a private school doesn't mean you don't support public education.

But I do think that our politicians should make time to be out and about around Lakewood - in all of our neighorhoods. I appreciate seeing them at the park at local restaurants, shopping in Lakewood and buying what Lakewood sells. And not only our Mayor - but their staffs as well. For example, I saw a woman who wanted to start a business come up to Jim O'Bryan at Bela Dubba and ask him how to start a buisness in Lakewood - we are lucky to have city representatives like him around for these questions - I'd like to see our planning director around more as other city representatives.

Maybe we have the same schedule - but I must say that I do see Mary Louise Madigan out very often at a wide variety of events and I can always ask her questions - even though she isn't my Ward councilman. BTW, Kevin Butler is and I do see him doing lots of positive things in our community. Neither of them have children - but that doesn't make them less committed to Lakewood either.