The Observation Deck

One of the lead bullet points used by proponents of school levy's is that if the levy fails property values will be sure to fall.

In May the voters in Lakewood soundly approved a levy. Many of our neighboring communities also passed levy's including RR and Westlake. Meanwhile two others N. Olmsted and the very desirable Avon had levy's that soundly failed. Well tonight they both failed with their second attempts. It will be interesting to see if the long used threat of falling property values holds true.

Will our property values stabilize? Will Avon's begin to fall? Or will Avon just become more desirable to all the tax avoiders that find its lower taxes so attractive.

Bill

Bill Trentel wrote:One of the lead bullet points used by proponents of school levy's is that if the levy fails property values will be sure to fall.

I've never seen any evidence that passing school levies sustains property values. While people point to "good schools" as a reason to move to a community what they really mean is good students. And anyway, there is very little relationship between what is spent and how students perform.

I did notice that Strongsville schools will soon be facing an annual deficit of $20 million dollars. They spend $53 million so the projected deficit will be 37% of the budget. I also noticed that payments for pensions and health care will be 63% of the amount spent on salaries. At that rate of increase in a few years they will be spending more on pensions and other benefits (paying people not to work) than they pay on salaries (paying people to work). The answer, of course, is higher taxes.

The newspapers do a good job of misrepresenting levies, why levies are needed and why schools face deficits. A recent article in the PD explained that schools have financial troubles because of the cost of footballs.

Bill Trentel wrote:One of the lead bullet points used by proponents of school levy's is that if the levy fails property values will be sure to fall.

In May the voters in Lakewood soundly approved a levy. Many of our neighboring communities also passed levy's including RR and Westlake. Meanwhile two others N. Olmsted and the very desirable Avon had levy's that soundly failed. Well tonight they both failed with their second attempts. It will be interesting to see if the long used threat of falling property values holds true.

Will our property values stabilize? Will Avon's begin to fall? Or will Avon just become more desirable to all the tax avoiders that find its lower taxes so attractive.

Bill

Bill T.,

In the mid-90's, I read an article in the Strongsville Sun paper that quoted Tom Bier. Bier was (maybe still is) a respected professor of Urban Studies at CSU. He was quite a collector of regional statistics.

I called the professor to ask about the article. Among other things, he told me that in Cuyahoga County, the communities that had the highest tax rates also had the highest appreciation of housing values. I asked him what he thought that might mean. He said that people want services, and are willing to pay for them.

In 2010, I'm not sure what current statistics might tell us. Because of the economy and its varied impact on regional communities, I would guess that the increased number of variables would make it difficult to make a snapshot test your "School Levy Theory", though I suspect that your questions are mostly rhetorical.

Bill Call wrote:I've never seen any evidence that passing school levies sustains property values. While people point to "good schools" as a reason to move to a community what they really mean is good students. And anyway, there is very little relationship between what is spent and how students perform.

I did notice that Strongsville schools will soon be facing an annual deficit of $20 million dollars. They spend $53 million so the projected deficit will be 37% of the budget. I also noticed that payments for pensions and health care will be 63% of the amount spent on salaries. At that rate of increase in a few years they will be spending more on pensions and other benefits (paying people not to work) than they pay on salaries (paying people to work). The answer, of course, is higher taxes.

The newspapers do a good job of misrepresenting levies, why levies are needed and why schools face deficits. A recent article in the PD explained that schools have financial troubles because of the cost of footballs.

Bill C.,

You are a sign of the times. Your comments lack fact and/or context. Unsupported rhetoric and complaining do not encourage reasonable and productive discussion.



Steve

.

stephen davis wrote:

Bill Trentel wrote:One of the lead bullet points used by proponents of school levy's is that if the levy fails property values will be sure to fall.

In May the voters in Lakewood soundly approved a levy. Many of our neighboring communities also passed levy's including RR and Westlake. Meanwhile two others N. Olmsted and the very desirable Avon had levy's that soundly failed. Well tonight they both failed with their second attempts. It will be interesting to see if the long used threat of falling property values holds true.

Will our property values stabilize? Will Avon's begin to fall? Or will Avon just become more desirable to all the tax avoiders that find its lower taxes so attractive.

Bill

Bill T.,

In the mid-90's, I read an article in the Strongsville Sun paper that quoted Tom Bier. Bier was (maybe still is) a respected professor of Urban Studies at CSU. He was quite a collector of regional statistics.

I called the professor to ask about the article. Among other things, he told me that in Cuyahoga County, the communities that had the highest tax rates also had the highest appreciation of housing values. I asked him what he thought that might mean. He said that people want services, and are willing to pay for them.

In 2010, I'm not sure what current statistics might tell us. Because of the economy and its varied impact on regional communities, I would guess that the increased number of variables would make it difficult to make a snapshot test your "School Levy Theory", though I suspect that your questions are mostly rhetorical.




Steve

.

No, it is a serious question. It should be interesting to see how each community is effected by its recent choices at the ballot box.
It is ironic that high taxes and lacking schools are often sighted by those who choose to flee Lakewood and lower taxes and superior schools are sighted as the reason for choosing Avon.
Will we see the population and property trends of the last 20 yrs. reverse? Will we soon witness the flight from Avon of residents looking to locate in community's like Lakewood who support our schools with our higher taxes?
If the campaign literature theory is correct then there should be some real world evidence to prove it available soon.

Bill

Bill Trentel wrote:No, it is a serious question. It should be interesting to see how each community is effected by its recent choices at the ballot box.
It is ironic that high taxes and lacking schools are often sighted by those who choose to flee Lakewood and lower taxes and superior schools are sighted as the reason for choosing Avon.
Will we see the population and property trends of the last 20 yrs. reverse? Will we soon witness the flight from Avon of residents looking to locate in community's like Lakewood who support our schools with our higher taxes?
If the campaign literature theory is correct then there should be some real world evidence to prove it available soon.

Bill

Bill,

Not sure about "soon", or if we can easily judge the effects of the ballot box versus other pressures. The economy and housing market may have changed mobility between communities for a while to come. We may see people investing more in the communities they live in as their opportunities to move dwindle.

Maybe not. Just a theory.

Also, the "high taxes and lacking schools" citations are often irrational, ignorant, or dishonest comparisons. I'm much more accepting of bigger kitchens, bathrooms, and closets, as reasons to move to Avon.

My opinion.


Steve

.

Does money make a difference?

Amount spent per pupil:

Shaker Heights $16,194
Cleveland Heights $16,037
Avon $8,000

School rating:

Shaker Heights: Effective
Cleveland Heights: Continuous Improvement
Avon: Excellent with distinction

Standards Met:

Shaker Heights: 23/30
Cleveland Heights: 10/30
Avon: 28/30

Property Tax rate:

Shaker Heights: 3.3
Cleveland Heights: 3.08
Avon: 1.75

Property appreciation 2000 - 2010

Shaker Heights -8%
Cleveland Heights -2%
Avon +19%

Property tax dollars paid on average value:

Shaker Heights - $6,270
Cleveland heights - $3,500
Avon - $3,552

Over a four year period Cleveland Heights spends about $800,000 more per classroom than Avon. What are they getting for that extra $800,000?

Bill, amount spent in the classroom is only part of the puzzle when it comes to academic success. There's a lot more that goes into it including the ability for the family to fund or even just prioritize learning outside the classroom and at home. There are many, many factors involved.

So you can't just say Avon spends less than Cleveland Heights and has better results so therefore spending less is better. That's a huge logical mistake.

You need to take the entire picture into account, you can't just pick and choose parts of the data or conveniently forget important factors just to try to support your argument.

Reality doesn't work that way.

Bill Call wrote:Over a four year period Cleveland Heights spends about $800,000 more per classroom than Avon. What are they getting for that extra $800,000?

Extra metal detectors?

Bryan Schwegler wrote:Bill, amount spent in the classroom is only part of the puzzle when it comes to academic success. There's a lot more that goes into it including the ability for the family to fund or even just prioritize learning outside the classroom and at home. There are many, many factors involved.

Federal adjusted gross income:

Cleveland Heights: $64,781
Shaker Heights: $116,937
Avon $81,222

What factors affect the ability of Shaker Heights families to support and fund their children outside the school? Cleveland Heights? Avon? Why are Avon families better able to prioritize? What could it be?

Bill –

Honestly, as always, your analysis of school districts, per pupil expenditures, performance, etc. remains completely off base.

Your theory that the performance of a district has little impact on local property values is interesting and should be tested. But, please, now you're comparing Avon with Shaker and Cleve. Hts./Univ. Hts. and wondering why Shaker and CH/UH spend more per pupil than Avon? The percentage of students served who (1) have disabilities, (2) are economically disadvantaged and (3) have limited English proficiency all play a role into the instructional and student support expenses. (Also, the school buildings in Shaker and CH/UH are much bigger and older than Avon’s and require more than double the per pupil expenditure on building operations expenditures than Avon spends.)

Like it or not, majority and expecially minority students from economically disadvantaged and non English speaking homes need more than rigorous curriculum to be successful. They need access to a networked array of wrap around social services to meet non-academic needs. Just under 58% of CH/UH students and 27.2% of Shaker’s students are economically disadvantaged as compared to 9.4% of Avon’s students. As far as minority representation goes, 53% of Shaker's students are black. In CH/UH, it's 76.6%. In Avon, it's 3.7%. These facts do matter in how curriculum needs to be delivered and, if a district has students in these profiles, requires expenditures on non-academic needs.

Not to consider the non-academic needs of the student population when comparing districts is not just imperfect, it’s nonsensical.


Furthermore, you mention the per capita income levels for each city. How about digging up a figure on how many school aged kids of Shaker families attend Shaker public schools versus that in Avon. How many families in Shaker making over $200,000 send their kids to Shaker schools? Answer, not many and I think it’s great that these families are making a conscious choice to send their children to private schools. Remember, though, these are the students who would be excelling in Shaker’s schools thus impacting that district’s overall rating.

How many Avon families making $150,000 or more are sending their kids to Avon’s schools? Answer, the vast, vast majority. Think of the impact this is having on the performance profile of Avon’s schools. So, I am dubious to accept your notion that federal adjusted gross income has anything to do with your argument and that “Avon families are better able to prioritize.”

I feel some of your opinions on how money for education is collected, spent and whether there is a correlation between a district’s performance and local property values are curious and merit discussion.

However, I don’t feel you are willing to discuss at all. You have all the answers and are not willing to take any other opinions into account. Am I wrong?

Lakewood spends their money very well on the children, whether it goes to higher qualified teachers or the materials they use. Their two week summer program to help Elementary aged kids in reading before the start of the school year has three motivated and excellent teachers, each with a station. An hour for reading, an hour for writing, and an hour for Wilson. This mostl likely helps many children who don't have English as a first language but also students like my son who is on the younger side of his grade who needs the extra push. I am constantly impressed with the education here.

In areas like Parma where they can't pass a levy, the students and their families have to suffer with cut services, some really needed, and more money for extracurricular activities. At one time no buses and they aren't a walking district. How many of those families might move out of the area and get sick of that for their kids, thus affecting the housing market. More houses on the market, less value for each. If Lakewood started cutting needed services for my kids and doubing up classrooms which affects their education and the quality of teaching I would seriously reconsider leaving. The schools matter most here to me and I am proud we pass our levys.

Bill Call wrote:

Bryan Schwegler wrote:Bill, amount spent in the classroom is only part of the puzzle when it comes to academic success. There's a lot more that goes into it including the ability for the family to fund or even just prioritize learning outside the classroom and at home. There are many, many factors involved.

Federal adjusted gross income:

Cleveland Heights: $64,781
Shaker Heights: $116,937
Avon $81,222

What factors affect the ability of Shaker Heights families to support and fund their children outside the school? Cleveland Heights? Avon? Why are Avon families better able to prioritize? What could it be?

Bill, there's no point in arguing with you. You continue to just pick a very narrow way to argue your "facts" as you take them out of context and leave out the inconventient truths that don't support your argument.

I will just once again reiterate that amount spent per pupil and median household income are just two pieces of the puzzle. There are many other factors including educational environemnt and facilities, % of families at poverty level, class size, and the list is pretty long. You cannot just take a few stats and make an argument.

I suspect you know that, but going deeper, like anyone with access to Google could do, would begin to poke holes in your tenuous argument.

I'm not saying if you examined everything that should be examined, your initial argument is not correctly, it very well might be. Rather, I just don't understand your need to be purposely misleading and obfuscate the issue.

I am going to take a very, very broad brush here and just point out that Bill's arguing technique is that of most conservatives on the US political scene today. That is what makes any effort at intelligent debate pretty much a pointless exercise.

Stan Austin

Stan Austin wrote:I am going to take a very, very broad brush here and just point out that Bill's arguing technique is that of most conservatives on the US political scene today. That is what makes any effort at intelligent debate pretty much a pointless exercise.

Stan Austin

If everyone would go back and look at Bill's posts again you'd find he isn't really arguing anything. He's engaging you all in discussion and doing a fine job of it. I don't know him that well but I think Bill is smart enough to know there are many more variables involved in school rankings than per pupil spending and average income. He throws numbers out there but there is no analysis, just merely presenting them to engage you in the analysis and you have done so.

I suspect he throws number out here because most conservatives like the results of something to be measurable. In order to gauge the performance of something, we conservatives use some kind of cost per whatever measure. There's also the cost vs benefit rule that says if the cost outweighs the benefit or perceived benefit you find a way to make it cost effective or come up with another alternative.

Just my two cents.

David Anderson wrote:Your theory that the performance of a district has little impact on local property values is interesting and should be tested. But, please, now you're comparing Avon with Shaker and Cleve. Hts./Univ. Hts. and wondering why Shaker and CH/UH spend more per pupil than Avon? curious and merit discussion.

However, I don’t feel you are willing to discuss at all. You have all the answers and are not willing to take any other opinions into account. Am I wrong?

Yes you are wrong.

Good catch on all of your points. I wondered if anyone was going to mention things like disadvantaged and minority students and the fact that th $200,000 per year Shaker resident is unlikely to send their kid to the public school.

All of those things are relevent. However, If spending an additional $160 million over a four year period on a per pupil basis is not enough to get good results how much is enough?

Justine Cooper wrote:education and the quality of teaching I would seriously reconsider leaving. The schools matter most here to me and I am proud we pass our levys.

Lakewood schools cannot afford to make anymore cuts without affecting the quality of education. We need to provide a quality education within the current budget restraints And for that to happen we need a school board willing to say no to the LTA.

How much sense does it make to have a contract that limits student/ teacher contact to five hours per day? How about an eight to hour day properyl supervised and properly supported? Just paying a teacher more money for fewer hours is not going to improve education.

Charlie Page wrote:He throws numbers out there but there is no analysis, just merely presenting them to engage you in the analysis and you have done so.

It takes about two minutes for the other sides arguments to begin and end with "Bill Call is a skunk".

I think it was Bismark who said that God looks after drunks and the United States of America. I might add that he (not she) looks after Lakewood as well. This town has dodged a lot of bullets over the years.

We aren't going to dodge this education bullet much longer unless we get a school board tht takes control of the management of the school.