The Observation Deck

Yes, if you care enough. Do you?

How?

Rhonda loje wrote:How?

At least two members of the school board must be replaced.

There are a lot of good reasons to keep Grant open instead of Lincoln. There are no good reasons to keep Lincoln open and close Grant.

Those of you who dedicated hundreds of volunteer hours came to the same conclusion. What you didn't know is that you were played. The decision was made to close Grant before your first meeting was held. I'm not going to provide the source but the information is from multiple sources and is rock solid.

The question is: Do you want to give up or do you want to fight?

Who are the next BOE members up for reelection? And when?

Bill,
Who would you recommend for the School Board that would win you your needed votes? Who from the School Board do you want out (including reasoning pertaining to their performance other than "they did not vote for Grant to remain")?

Corey

Bill Call wrote:Yes, if you care enough. Do you?

I do.

I do, too.

The following is an article that was submitted by me to the Lakewood Observer. It did not run this last issue, maybe next issue. However, I think that it is relevant to the discussion and I would like to share my thoughts with you.



Last week, I attended the Community Leaders Breakfast at Lakewood High School an event at which city, business, and school leaders come together for networking, to experience tasty food provided by Ranger Catering, and to hear about what is going on in our community and in the Greater Cleveland region.

One of the issues discussed was the Lakewood Schools Levy coming up on May 4th. Mayor Fitzgerald, a co-chair for the committee promoting the levy campaign, reminded the leaders in the audience that all Lakewood citizens have a stake in the levy, whether or not they have kids in school, or just have a house or business in Lakewood. He reminded all of us that having excellent schools in Lakewood plays a huge role in attracting new residents and families to our city. Now more than ever, it is crucial that Lakewood be able to do this.

As we learn more about the census it is becoming clear that keeping our population above 50,000 allows us to receive the funding we need to help keep Lakewood a great place to live. Attracting new families is necessary. Losing families would be catastrophic.

The recent decision by the Lakewood Board of Education not to include Grant Elementary as part of the Phase 3 Facilities Plan, which may lead to this centrally located school being closed, will send out the wrong message to people, particularly families, looking to make Lakewood their new home. Lakewood is a city positioned to attract new residents and businesses that will increase student enrollment in our schools.

When you factor in the "grandchildren of the babyboom" phenomenon that journalists have been talking about (Google "new baby boom" to read about it)--you realize that Lakewood's current student enrollment has just recently been affected by the spike in births that parallels the baby boom that began in 1953. According to the CDC, since 2003, live birth rates have been rising in a curve that almost exactly parallels the curve in 1953. In 2007, there were more live births than ever before in the United State's history. These children are three years old, and have yet to hit our schools, but they are on their way, and we're feeling it here. In fact, Lakewood’s student enrollment has been increasing over the past two years, and that is before you factor in Sts. Cyril and Methodius Elementary School closing. As of right now, our SEVEN school buildings are very close to being filled to their maximum capacity.

Keeping our remaining seven elementary schools in Lakewood sends out the positive message that Lakewood Schools are excellent and financially healthy, the community is committed to making decisions that are educationally sound (i.e. that we are able to maintain small class sizes) and that Lakewood is and will continue to be a unique and walkable city that values its children. Without seven schools, and particularly without the one in the center, Lakewood is a lot less walkable. If potential new homeowners are interested in schools for their families, or families they might like to have someday, they will see that Lakewood has NOT made it easy for them to get those children to school, especially if they are looking at some of Lakewood’s most attractive real estate, homes that are less than ten minutes from the centrally located Downtown.

Citizens of Lakewood would welcome and embrace the opportunity to decide for ourselves whether or not we want to close another elementary school.

Unfortunately, the community has not been given the opportunity to vote on a ballot whether or not they would be willing to pay for the renovation of one of our elementary schools. The cost to renovate or rebuild an elementary school on our own is very low, costing citizens only a few dollars per month. We could also decide to wait to renovate keeping a school open that requires only minor repairs, until a day when the District’s economic health is more robust, and then that last school could be renovated. All of the schools don’t have to be renovated at once, especially during difficult economic times.

The investment in our community to keep all of our current elementary schools would ensure equitable class sizes, provide safe walking routes, would make certain our tax dollars are being used responsibly and benefit all students who want an excellent education. This, more than anything else, would send out a positive message attracting families to our city, and would allow us the maximum flexibility our school district requires. It is the only responsible way to prepare for the next 50 years.

The levy is May 4th, and I hope that Lakewood will provide our schools with the funding they need to maintain excellent programming.

I would also ask that citizens think critically about the decisions the Lakewood Board of Education is making not only for our schools, but for our city, and the long-term impact those decisions will have on our city.

Lakewood citizens can and do make a difference. We should have the opportunity to choose what is best or our city, our schools, our neighborhoods and our future.

Who would you recommend for the School Board that would win you your needed votes? Who from the School Board do you want out (including reasoning pertaining to their performance other than "they did not vote for Grant to remain")?

Corey,

Four of our BOE members didn't just simply vote not to make Grant part of Phase III. They made a decision that they could not and would not provide a rationale for making. To this date, we still don't have a good reason how Lincoln Elementary is a better educational choice for educating our children. Bill Call is correct. There is evidence that this BOE did make the decision to demolish Grant (in 2008) and that Phase III process was nothing more than an elaborate display of pretending to care about what the Lakewood community values. More to come at a later date.

Over the last several years the willingness, of at least 3 of our BOE members, to be open, transparent, or accountable has severely diminished. There have been many instances other than Phase III in which our BOE members have proven that they are not in any way connected to the families and kids they serve.

Rhonda,

The "how" comes into play when our BOE wants us to given them the money to fund a plan that is not in the best interest of Lakewood. I don't think that when many learn of the irresponsible way that they plan on using our tax money (Bond and Perm. Maintenance Levy) that they will be willing to given them permission to proceed with the current Phase III plan. Again, more to come.

Who then, Kristine, would you recommend for the Board seats? Who would you like to see removed? I know you say "more to come" but what in the past/criteria would you be placing as emphasis for dismissal and replacement?

Corey

Corey wrote:Who would you recommend for the School Board that would win you your needed votes? Who from the School Board do you want out (including reasoning pertaining to their performance other than "they did not vote for Grant to remain")?

Corey, I think John Komkutis and Linda Beebe are up for election in 2011 for a term that begins in 2012.

Kristine Pagsuyoin wrote:[
Four of our BOE members didn't just simply vote not to make Grant part of Phase III. They made a decision that they could not and would not provide a rationale for making. .....

Over the last several years the willingness, of at least 3 of our BOE members, to be open, transparent, or accountable has severely diminished. There have been many instances other than Phase III in which our BOE members have proven that they are not in any way connected to the families and kids they serve.

[/quote]

Kristine, your article was brilliant.

The closure of Grant will do more damage to the schools than the failure of the levy on the first try. The levy will be back again next May. When Grant is gone it is gone for good.