- Connect
- Login
- Print Subscription
|
Welcome,
| |
| |
- Most Commented
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Most Emailed
- Popular
- Popular
« Opinion
Schools are an investment in children and community
Schools are an investment in children and community
We write a version of this editorial twice a year, and while it is never easy, it becomes more difficult every year that the economy remains in stagnation and families struggle with their own budgets.
Still, it is important to remember that spending today on education is an investment in the future. It is an investment that past generations have made for the betterment of all, and that when we stop investing in education, we stop believing in the future.
That said, we recognize that these are difficult times. And, we believe, that the elected members of local boards of education recognize that as well. They take their responsibility to their community seriously and they do not approach their constituents lightly when asking for passage of a school levy.
School tax issues come in four basic flavors, if you will.
UAdditional levies, which will result in an increase of the full millage being sought.
URenewal levies, which may actually be less than the face value, because as the cumulative valuation of a district increases over the years, the effective rate for collection purposes is recalculated.
UReplacement levies, which generally represent at least a slight increase in taxation because the full face amount is collected, negating the diminishing effect that new construction or higher valuations may have had on the effective rate.
UBond issues, that allow the sale of bonds to raise lump sums for capital improvements and that are repaid over a period of years or decades.
These days, bond issues for building new schools are particularly attractive investments for most local school districts in Ohio, because for every dollar pledged locally, nearly a dollar and sometimes more is provided by the state.
In Austintown, the district is billing its building program as buy one, get one free, because local taxpayers will put up 53 percent of the cost of new construction while the state will pay 47 percent.
There are four taxation issues for schools in Mahoning County and nine in Trumbull County.
Mahoning
AUSTINTOWN SCHOOLS: A 2.4-mill, 37-year bond issue and a 0.5-mill, 37-year additional levy to make building improvements to raise $26,682,099.
CANFIELD SCHOOLS: A 1-mill replacement levy for a continuous period of time for permanent improvements to raise $560,811 annually.
JACKSON-MILTON SCHOOLS: A 2.1-mill, 5-year renewal levy to avoid an operating deficit to raise $383,088 annually.
WESTERN RESERVE SCHOOLS: A 4.6-mill, 10-year renewal levy for emergency purposes to raise $425,000 annually.
Trumbull
BLOOMFIELD-MESPO SCHOOLS: A 3.4-mill, 5-year renewal for emergency requirements of the district, to raise $170,000 annually.
HOWLAND SCHOOLS: A 3.9-mill, 5-year renewal to avoid an operating deficit, to raise $2.5 million annually.
LAKEVIEW SCHOOLS: A 3.75-mill, 5-year additional levy to provide for emergency requirements of the school district to raise $1,050,000 annually.
LIBERTY SCHOOLS: A 9.9-mill, 10-year additional levy for emergency requirements of the school district to raise $2,291,362 annually.
MATHEWS SCHOOLS: A bond issue to build and equip a new K-12 school building and improve and equip its site and building, furnishing and improving other school facilities and clearing and improving their sites to raise $22.5 million.
MCDONALD SCHOOLS: A 4.9-mill, 5-year additional levy to provide for the emergency requirements of the school district to raise $260,000 annually.
NILES SCHOOLS: A 4.6-mill, 10-year renewal for the emergency requirements of the school district to raise $1.3 million annually.
SOUTHINGTON SCHOOLS: A 5-mill, 3-year additional for emergency requirements of the district, to raise $320,000.
WEATHERSFIELD SCHOOLS: An 8.4-mill bond issue to raise $8.4 million over 28 years and 1.8-mill continuous tax levy to raise $131,739 annually to participate in an Ohio School Facilities Commission project to add on to Seaborn Elementary to turn it into a K-8 building and raze the middle school, except for the gym, auditorium and bus garages.
In addition to the school issues, there is a countywide renewal of Issue 5 in Mahoning County that is of vital importance to a segment of the county’s children and young people. That is the 1-mill, five year renewal of a levy to support the Children Services Board. This funding is critical to the continued support of programs that help neglected and abused children. Renewal of the levy is especially important because economic conditions put strains on families that sometimes affect children even more than adults. In addition, state budget cutbacks have cut into local CSB operating funds.
While we are mindful that taxes take a painful bite out of everyone’s pocket, we urge voters to view these issues for their importance to the future of the community and to support education and children services with a yes vote on Nov. 3.
- Requires free registration.
Comments
Investing in inner city schools is a tremdous waste of hard earned money. Reduce investment in them, purchase farm equipment, teach them to plant, cultivate and harvast crops; at least they'll be able to feed themselves.
Ask yourself why ALSD needs an additional levy for building improvements. All they have to do is sell that monster on Mahoning Avenue. Or maybe they could have used the money from the AMS building to do that. Oh, wait, they spent that on turf and repairs to the stadium. Priorities, priorities..... Maybe they could have used the money they were supposed to receive back from the OFC from the building of AMS. Oh wait, they didn't build it to the OFC specifications. No more money for them to waste. We said No last year, we say No again this year, no new levies to the BOE so they can waste it on things other than the kids and their education.
Do you really think the district is going to make $26 milllion from the sale of the old AMS property??? Would you rather have the stadium condemned? (I'm not sure AMS money was spent on that, anyway.)
The 26 million is from the bond issue. Yes, 250,000 of the balance of the AMS construction funds was used on the stadium. Pull the funding records, it is there in black and white. The stadium needed to be maintained all these years, not left to go to crap so they were forced to do reconstruction. The levy is for building maintenance for Fitch and AMS (the new one). It is a completely separate thing from the bond issue and that needs to be pointed out. If the district had done their EPA reports properly and taken care of the tank issue when it was first discovered, then they could get the 2-3 million from the old AMS property.
Thanks for the clarification. Just to be clear, the 0.5 mill levy is for maintenance of Fitch and AMS, and not at all for building improvements as reported above?
I'm not sure how the district could have maintained the stadium better to prevent the repairs that were done. Regardless, the surplus AMS money couldn't have been used to prevent this levy. That money was allocated for construction only.
The original plan with the stated allocated funds from the OFC funding to the "improvements" ( I used the word maintenance and that is incorrect) of Fitch and AMS. Then the OFC came back and said that they could not include that cost in with the cost of building new buildings.
They could have made those repairs when they were first discovered instead of just letting them go. The visitor stadium was starting to disintegrate in the 90s. The grounds keeper wanted to fix the issues, something a couple of bags of concrete would have cured, but they told him NO.
If that money was allocated for construction only then why were things like a Gator and new dishwashers purchased? Construction money to provide upgrades and maintenance to the two schools is more believable than the other things.
A couple of bags of concrete would NOT have prevented or fixed the structural problems the west stands were having. (not sure if they are visitor or home)
Where were the new dishwashers put? I would expect to buy new dishwashers for the new AMS. I don't know anything about the Gator, though. Is that in the funding records, too?
You don't know that. I still can not fathom why what happens in our schools is so important to you, CITY resident. You constantly keep comments going on every single story about the schools. Not sure exactly why you think you are the expert on our schools, but from the things you don't know about what is happening, I can tell you are definitely not in the loop on the goings on.
Yes, it is in the funding and it was for Fitch and those are not the only two items.
i used to work with someone who complained bitterly about school taxes.
he had no problem though taking his boys to a professinal sporting event and spending close to $ 100 for the day.
while it's wonderful he and his sons did things together, i dodid question his priorities