Hot News!
• Enquirer: No mayor primary? Save $400K
• Enquirer: Mayor race set without primary
• WCPO: Political Blogger Withdraws From Mayor Race
Tweets!
Visit us at Twitter!
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•City on Hook for F.S. Restaurant (2008)•Bob Kraft, Henry Heimlich’s Spokesperson, Hypes Nazi (2007)
•Debunkify Countdown for July 10th (2006)
•Sleepwalking to Disaster (2006)
Contact Us
v mail: (513) 685-0678
e mail: click here
Monday, August 13, 2007
You will be asked to raise your taxes for an unconstitutional school funding system
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Photo courtesy of here.
After building several brand new buildings to replace several that didn’t have anything wrong with them, Cincinnati Public Schools is gearing up to ask property owners for a tax increase, claiming the district faces a $79 million deficit without more money. But before we start thinking about those figures—and whether they are accurate or politicized—what about the fact that Ohio’s school funding formula has been found unconstitutional on several occasions? Should we really raise our taxes to fund a broken system? Or, should we push to fix the system first?
According to this article in The Enquirer, CPS faces a huge deficit if taxes are not raised:
Members of the Cincinnati school board agree that a major tax levy is almost certainly headed for the November ballot, less than two weeks after the board’s controlling majority said they were unsure it would be necessary.
Their abrupt realization came Aug. 2, when newly hired Treasurer Jonathan Boyd forecast a potential $79 million budget deficit by 2009 without a massive tax hike.
Here’s a recent article from the Delphos Herald, describing precisely what is wrong with Ohio’s funding formula:
All 613 districts must deal with the formula, which many say is so complicated that it’s difficult to understand and explain. However, Delphos City Schools Superintendent Bruce Sommers is up to the task.
According to Sommers, the state multiplies a uniform $5,403 per-student rate by a cost-of-doing-business factor that varies in each district. The state then multiplies that figure by the number of students. This brings Delphos City Schools to $5.6 million. The state also gives Delphos more than $49,000 as an “add-on” but then subtracts a very large portion before continuing its calculations.
“So, let’s make a long story short. If you take $5.6 million plus $49,000 in round numbers, you’ve got $5,650,000,” he began. “It would be fantastic if that were our total but it isn’t. Why not? Because the state deducts, from that number, 23 mills of what your assess valuation (property taxes) generates in your school district. Well, in Delphos, the state says we have an assess valuation — and they get this by working with Mr. Diepenbrock and Mrs. Dixon in their respective county auditor offices — of $171,949,779. Multiply that by .023 and we have to subtract $3,954,000. So, what does Delphos get? $1.8 million.”
The state then adds reimbursements for things such as transportation costs and funds paid to Vantage Career Center for Jefferson students to attend the vocational school.
“When all is said and done, Delphos City Schools’ net state funding is $2,700,000 and some change,” Sommers said.
The money deducted on the basis of property values is called a “charge-off.”
Sommers says the state only pays for one-third of the district’s annual funding, leaving local taxpayers to pick up the other two-thirds. The taxpayer burden would be much less if not for the charge-off.
According to The Enquirer article, “The levy would increase annual taxes on a $100,000 home by $299, according to the district. Today, that home’s owner pays $1,639 in property taxes, with $1,013 of that going to CPS.”
Shouldn’t we be talking about the unconstitutionality of Ohio’s funding formula before mounting a political campaign to raise taxes?
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.
13 Aug 2007 at 08:50 am | #
If they can’t do simple math- and provide teacher’s with decent raises and put our kid’s into decent schools (Before the huge build-a-thon-that is a state mandate!!!) when is enough. I have always voted for the levies. ALWAYS-even though my child attends a private school. I won’t deal with the lack of control in the schools(and I have coached a CPS team-and know what these kids are like.
But when will it stop and our schools get on the right track.
Does anyone know how Indiana schools are funded? They have higher test scores, great salaries for teachers and better buildings.
13 Aug 2007 at 09:01 am | #
As a property owner and property tax payer in the Cincinnati Public School district, I am fixated on the fact that we already fund a school district budget of $428 Million for a student population of approximately 33,000 which equates to $12,900 per student funding.
If CPS can’t get by on that kind of budget, then ask yourselves what is the single largest budgetary cost item that has to be addressed? Teacher salaries and benefits. Because the teachers union has always had seniority and tenure protection clauses in its contracts, it has created a situation where the teaching staff is skewed toward the more costly end of the scale.
My opinion is that CPS needs to “rif” a lot of teachers through another voluntary retirement offer or perhaps even an involuntary separation.
I won’t support an increase in my property taxes until CPS addresses personnel costs AND shows even more improvement in academic achievement of minority students and improved graduation rate.
13 Aug 2007 at 11:53 am | #
So basically, what you’re saying is, thousands of school children should face funding cuts because the State of Ohio can’t get its act together?
School funding through property taxes is a monumentally stupid and unfair way to get much needed money to our schools. But, it’s the only way to get the money right now, and we should support the levy. Jason and other anti-education COAST puppets don’t get it. CPS is forced to work within this system whether Jason likes it, or not. They are not the ones responsible for fixing the system. Direct your anger at your state representative, state senator, and the governor, Jason.
13 Aug 2007 at 12:20 pm | #
We should be talking about it, but we aren’t.
Meanwhile, districts are trying creative funding schemes. Medina County passed a 0.5% sales tax increase to pay for their schools. School districts like Hamilton, Oak Hills and Little Miami have moved inside millage into their permanent improvement funds. And on and on and on….
Even though it seems like the majority of school boards in the state voted to support Getting It Right for Ohio’s Future, it won’t get on this November’s ballot. This means another full year under a broken system.
13 Aug 2007 at 04:03 pm | #
I’m not opposed to public education. Really. But how does this kind of change happen without an emergency? What, should we just keep paying more and more and more into a broken system and hope it gets fixed one day?
13 Aug 2007 at 04:11 pm | #
So all it took was having a beer with COAST for you to start on the attack against the public schools. If you remember, I predicted you would be doing that. I’d like to also distribute the burden more fairly, perhaps through a sales tax instead of property taxes, but don’t forget, property taxes are tax deductible. Good thing because the new jail that will inevitably be built, will probably also be put on the property owner’s backs instead of more fairly through a sales tax. I’ll always support the schools. I believe we are obligated to provide a K-12 eduction to every child. And I don’t know anyplace else in the country that the teachers have to go begging at a place called “Crayons to Computers” to get supplies for their students. That alone is a testament to their dedication. Would you go begging for a computer or a desk or paper that your employer should provide?.
13 Aug 2007 at 05:28 pm | #
The answer to this question is to change the people in charge who aren’t working to fix the broken funding system. Positive change happens by electing leaders who will work to fix the problem.
Simply put, yes. Again, Jason, learn to direct your anger. Your “solution” is not to fix anything. It’s to completely scrap the system. Fine Jason, let’s keep voting against levies until Cincinnati Public Schools have no ability to operate. How is that any different from the Republican mantra of government so small you can drown it in a bathtub? Cincysue is right. One project with Brinkman, and you swallow his koolaid.
13 Aug 2007 at 07:18 pm | #
Cincysue says: “...I’ll always support the schools. ...”. This is the kind of thinking that the schools depend on. It is like a religious belief. What are our objectives in supporting the schools? What do we get out of it? If a few get an outstanding education, the probability is that they will get out of town the first chance they get. And we cause a fraud on most of the kids by telling them something like: If you go to school you can be a ________.
And when they are old enough for college, a few will get in and then amass a debt that can’t be forgiven and will last for years. And it is doubtful that those that graduate will get jobs in the areas of their studies.
In the case of Cincinnati, we can’t afford more of what we are doing in the schools. People are fleeing this school district for the suburban districts. A lot of the success that kids have in getting good paying jobs depends on the contacts they make in school. What are the chances of getting a special introduction when all of you contacts are poor and don’t have any contacts.
If for no other reason than the last point, we would be doing the Cincinnati kids a favor by shutting down the Cincinnati Public Schools. State law will require requires that the abutting district absorb the kids. These kinds have a tough enough time dealing with learning and it is made worse with ghetto problems.
Until these overpriced administrators figure out how to teach the kids, we should not reward their incompetence.
And why are local districts expected to pay for education? The entire country is supposed to realize the rewards of an educated population. It is frustrating to pay for a kid’s education to see him flee the city upon graduation. The federal government gets the benefits almost always, so why doesn’t it pay for all education?
14 Aug 2007 at 01:58 am | #
I just want to know—when is the funeral, ‘cause the Cincinnati Beacon is dead.
I hate all the taxes too - especially, I hate the school tax - but for Christ’s sake Jason, Justin, MEP, and friends of COAST—you don’t make children pay for the mistakes of the elected bureaucrats!
We don’t have a universal health care system funded properly - so, let’s stop giving these poor kids free immunizations, asthma treatments, prenatal care, yearly doctor visits, etc. Until the system is fixed let’s screw over the kids.
You’ve really lost it.
I’m looking for a new blog voice - anybody got any suggestions?
14 Aug 2007 at 05:15 am | #
What’s funny (or, actually, not so funny) is that anon2000 is incapable of having a conversation.
Do you really think I’m attending COAST meetings and getting memos from them? That is absurd.
I’m in the market for a new house. Unlike a lot of families, I do not want to move out of the City. This means, quite frankly, that there are several sacrifices we must make in terms of housing stock quality, price, etc.
Hey anon2000—do you even live in the City limits? Do you even pay any of the taxes you want me to pay?
The Ohio funding system is unconstitutional. So what is the leadership of CPS doing? If they are doing something, I’d love to know.
14 Aug 2007 at 05:17 am | #
BTW, anon2000—had you ever been in any of the buildings that got replaced?
I remember the old Schroder. I was shocked when I learned Schroder was one of the school’s getting rebuilt. I’ve been in the old Schroder. I cannot, for the life of me, remember a single thing wrong with it.
I have heard, however, that new Schroder already has peeling floor tiles. And the new location? New Schroder is in a weird location. Old Schroder had a neighborhood feel. This new thing is next to the 5/3 call center and Coke.
14 Aug 2007 at 05:20 am | #
I wonder why people are so incapable of reading.
The point of this article, as summarized in the concluding paragraph, was to ask this question:
I am amazed that no one thinks that a significant topic. That more important is to keep giving Rosa Blackwell’s CPS more money by any means necessary.
14 Aug 2007 at 06:46 am | #
Wow, Jason…you are learning well from your COAST elders. You’re picking up their tactic. First, completely negate your opponent by insulting their intelligence. Tom Brinkman must be proud.
Of course it’s a significant issue, but trust me, Jason, nobody here is fighting for Rosa. Anon2000 actually put it very well, saying “you don’t make children pay for the mistakes of the elected bureaucrats”. I would add appointed in Rosa’s case.
By the way, I’ve lived in the city my whole life, and I can tell the different between a good tax and a bad tax. School taxes are good, jail taxes are not. Jason’s problem is, he spends five minutes with Tom Brinkman, and all the sudden, he’s in the “all taxes are bad” boat. Fortunately, anything Brinkman captains and Jason crews is bound to be a sinking ship.
14 Aug 2007 at 08:02 am | #
WHAT!
The old CPS buildings “didn’t have anything wrong with them”? Don’t you remember the big expose the Post did on the crumbling schools?
And let’s not forget the assessment of every school that was done before the decision to replace/refurbish them. A summary of Shroder’s assessment can be found here:
http://www.cps-k12.org/general/facilities/schools/UpdatedProf/UShroder.pdf
Yes, Shroder was a so-called “borderline” building, where the estimated rehab cost was around the cutoff percentage of building a new building. (Basically, if the estimated rehab cost was above x% of the estimate “new construction” cost, CPS and the State decided it would be better to build new.)
But you, as a layperson, can’t remember “a single thing wrong” with the old building. As the summary says, the old building had inadequate ventilation, no sprinkler system, had under-sized classrooms, and was not ADA compliant. I’m sure your physically abled kids would have no problems using that building, but given the hue and cry you raised over disabled access to the Fountain Square Garage, you should have more concern about disabled children having equal access to schools.
But heaven forbid the new building have “peeling floor tiles”. Not like that prevents kids from learning. I think it would be more difficult to learn in a cramped, stuffy, un-accessible building.
14 Aug 2007 at 08:20 am | #
Hey the first poster had an idea? Does anyone know how Indiana schools are funded? They have great buildings, teacher salaries are above the national average, and the kids are learning.
Look at some of the smaller districts to see how they are trying to cope w/ the cuts. NCH, Norwood, Lockland, Wyoming(ok they tax crosswalks!) but they are finding ways to survive the cuts. And they also have teachers that stay!
And Jason-it does appear you’re COASTING…sorry to say. Bad idea to just be around then to listen and try to pick up something-It might not be able to be cured.
14 Aug 2007 at 09:37 am | #
Since finding the funding system unconstitutional, I don’t see why new levies are even allowed.
Seems like, if one is passed, it would be fairly easy to overturn it in the courts.
Now, THAT would be expensive.
14 Aug 2007 at 10:15 am | #
A budget ‘crisis’ in the Cincinnati schools will not make the legislators in Columbus deal with this issue any more quickly. The legislature has been dragging its feet for YEARS over the funding problem, and the failure of levy after levy throughout the state has done nothing to motivate it to move any faster.
If you want change in the school funding formula, the appropriate venue for that change is in the statehouse, not the schoolhouse. I can guarantee that holding schools hostage because you don’t like how the legislators are (not) doing their job will result in a big collective yawn from Columbus. No matter how much you try to masquerade your reluctance to pay for bare-bones schools as political activism, you’re simply giving people one more reason to push their kids to parochial school or move to the ‘burbs.
In the meantime, make no mistake: you will pay for school funding one way or another. If funding reform ever comes through from Columbus, you will either pay higher income tax or higher sales tax or continue to see your property taxes raised. Just because schools start getting checks from Columbus instead of Hamilton County doesn’t mean that a magic pot of gold got uncovered in Dublin.
14 Aug 2007 at 10:22 am | #
Anon2000,
you wrote “anybody got any suggestions?” Yes, go away or pull your head out of your ass and see the light of day.
14 Aug 2007 at 01:37 pm | #
Hee Hee. The Beacon is talking about *PAYING* taxes… Snicker,snort…
14 Aug 2007 at 04:09 pm | #
I never said all taxes are bad, and I have not problem supporting good things.
But I’m concerned about a school tax because we already know the funding system is wrong.
I’ll need to check, but weren’t there some rumblings about a year ago concerning a threatened lawsuit against the public schools? They made claims about how many new buildings the tax they earned would build, then they didn’t build that many.
14 Aug 2007 at 04:31 pm | #
Dean - you have no convictions and I don’t mean criminal. You have a child. I don’t. I have no dog in the public school system race, but I do have a moral obligation to make available to other people what was available to me as a child. A public school education. And Dieterschmied, screw you, idiot. What I’m sick of is paying for whining parasites like yourself and now you can add the Dean, Michael Patton and that rich singer to the mix, who want to use all the services but pay for nothing and ride on the backs of the rest of us. Now that the Dean is considering buying a house—now that it affects him personally—all of the sudden he’s against school funding. What a punk you are. And you have (or had) the balls to talk about the impact of poverty and illiteracy on crime rates, though you’ve dropped that recently, and still propose defunding the schools. Reading the Beacon is the online version of WLW radio and Fox network. And where does your fucking idiot guru Brinkman get all the deep pockets to continually sue the city. I suspect that somehow the taxpayer is footing the bill. Dean you are totally predictable. Progessives got you first so you were an all-out, feet-first progressive. Now the conservatives have got you so you go that way. Like I say, what a punk.
14 Aug 2007 at 04:41 pm | #
In 2004, I had an interview/argument with Tom Brinkman. I spent most of the time debating gay rights. He is against gay rights, and I find that position deplorable.
We also talked about property taxes. He said that people move away from the City due to property taxes. At the time, thinking only of my current tax rate, I said I didn’t believe it. I said people would not choose to live outside the City over a few bucks here and there.
I didn’t give it much thought.
Then, I got in the market for a house. I noticed the huge difference on a monthly budget deciding to live in the City would cost. In addition to the older house I’d get at a higher price, the tax rate is significantly higher. In my price range, we’re talking $200 per month. That is a huge jump from my current rate.
I know Mallory has said that our population is not declining. I’m not sure if that’s true—but if so, how much of that increase comes in the from of new construction purchases that have 15 year tax abatements?
Families are leaving the City. Young professionals are moving in and not paying property taxes. The rest is left to everyone else. And just being a property owner does not make one “rich.” There are plenty of us on a budget. But I guess you just want me to leave the City. Knock down my old house, build a new one with a 15 year tax abatement, and continue to shift the burden onto whom?
And what do you mean reading The Beacon is like WLW? The right-winged crowd wants to build crappy jails to warehouse prisoners.
I say we need LESS people in jail, not MORE.
I’m also concerned at moving treatment out of the communities and into the jails. I would hope that we would want to do the opposite!
I would vote for a tax increase concerning criminal justice if I thought it made any sense.
And I have not said I’m voting against the school levy. I’m asking questions. I’m curious about all the new construction. Did they deliver on the promises they made first time? Did they make the number of buildings they said? What is their quality? Will they only last 40 years, like some of the ones being replaced?
When I asked about green technologies in the new buildings, I found out it isn’t there. That’s strange to me. With the rising price of natural resources, why didn’t they have the foresight to build with a mind toward conserving resources?
I watched the new Schroder go up. I was surprised to see a particle board roof with shingles on a school. I was surprised that the rooms do not seem to utilize natural light more. I am surprised that energy saving technologies were not utilized to their fullest.
What is the solution to all of this?
14 Aug 2007 at 05:00 pm | #
May I ask what your point is on this and the references to Schroder? One of the reasons for the push for the facilities levy was the near-matching funds the State of Ohio offered. Without the levy, CPS wouldn’t get any construction money from the State of Ohio. That is completely different and separate from operating levies. I know you’re going to come back with Tom Brinkman’s tired rhetoric about a pattern of the schools not spending money properly, but I’d really appreciate a real answer instead of canned COAST talking points.
14 Aug 2007 at 05:43 pm | #
People are moving out of the city because of crime. Ask them instead of Tom Brinkman. They don’t feel safe. Crime is directly related to poverty. Good schools. Good programs such as job training and rehabilitation, help with housing, food and transportation, all help to instill hope and pride and reduce crime. It’s simple. Do you think Tom Brinkman would agree with that? No. Brinkman doesn’t give a shit about living, breathing, children. He cares about theoretical children. And that’s easy isn’t it? They don’t cost anything do they? Something that doesn’t exist doesn’t require much.
You won’t find anybody that will say they moved to the burbs for a few hundred dollars savings in property taxes. How about doing something about the leaches that get these 15 year abatements and don’t contribute a dime. Why doesn’t Brinkman work on that? Why don’t you? Has he stated his position on this during your frequent social interactions?
Like I said I don’t have kids in school, or kids that need health care. I’m not old enough for senior services. I pay for full health coverage so don’t use subsidized health services. I’m not on social services like the WIC program, don’t use the inflated price housing vouchers that Michael Patton takes for his rental properties, don’t use the public pools etc., so why should I have to pay for them? Because it’s a moral obligation. Though all of the agencies that administer all of the services could probably tighten up on the budget—as could every other business—I’m honored to be able to at least feel that I can make a contribution to helping make people’s lives better, especially children. I would be embarrassed to say that I didn’t support education for children. My dream would be for every child to walk into an air conditioned, modern, facility with small classrooms, art and music classes, after school child care and tutoring, extra curricular activities and well-paid teachers. In other words an environment that encourages creativity and learning. But you and others like you, the COASTers, don’t even want to supply the bare bones.
14 Aug 2007 at 06:23 pm | #
This is getting silly. You are all acting like Tom Brinkman is my best friend. As best I can recall, I have done something you could construe as “socialize” with the guy on about two occasions in three years. Get a grip.
I have never said I support COAST as an organization. I think they have raised a few interesting points, but that overall they use right-winged fear mongering propaganda to achieve goals I don’t like. But sometimes they say things that strike me as correct.
When they are right—like they are in opposing a jail tax (even if their reason for opposing it are different from mine)—then they are right; and when they are wrong—like when they fabricated an abortion issue against Portune and Pepper—then I call them on that, too.
I have heard that people leave Hamilton County due to crime. But I have not met those people. The people I know all talk about how they can get a brand new house with more land for cheaper.
Please link to a study where people were surveyed so I can study their answers about why they leave the City.
Is Pleasant Ridge unsafe? Are people running in fright from Oakley?
14 Aug 2007 at 06:29 pm | #
Teacher,
It’s funny. You asked a question, the prohibited me from giving certain answers. What if one of those answers happened to be correct?
(I feel like I’m arguing with Thrasymachus in The Republic.)
14 Aug 2007 at 07:10 pm | #
How could I prohibit you from giving answers? Is that meant for me? And you didn’t call out COAST on anything. You mildly mentioned that they might have been bad but mostly talked about Todd Portune being worse. Hardly a stinging indictment. But,
I just pulled up Sibcy Cline’s website and did a very unscientific quick and dirty comparison of property taxes—which are listed for each property—between Hamilton County and Butler County. I selected the county, a single family home, in a $150,000 price range. Looked at about a half dozen in each county. There is barely a few hundred dollars difference between counties. Nothing in the thousands which might be a tie breaker. Sometimes Hamilton County is higher, sometimes Butler. There’s no significant difference. That’s not the reason people are moving away. But you’re right that you can get more bang for your buck outside of the city. I’d like to get an affordable condo and rid myself of the albotross of a 100+ year old home that requires more feedings than a newborn. But I would have to go outside of the city to do that. There are no affordable condos within the city with shopping and recreation close by. Why doesn’t Brinkman do something about that instead of spreading propaganda for the charter school lobbyists that own him.
And the people I know say they move because there’s too much shooting going on in the city. They’re scared for their kids. I don’t need a study. Somebody got shot at the Peace Rally for Christ’s sake. Please link a study that shows that people are moving out of Hamilton County because of high property taxes. And please, no COAST propagranda.
14 Aug 2007 at 07:22 pm | #
cincysue, the first part was for Teacher, who wrote:
On comparing property taxes by county: let’s say they are all the same. A new house of a certain size out of the County costs less than in the City. So the tax would still be higher in terms of comparing products. That’s irritating.
But maybe that’s not me thinking like a statistician, and just someone thinking about the housing market.
I do not know why Brinkman doesn’t make people build affordable condos near shopping. Maybe I’ll ask him next year when I see him for a few minutes. (There are plenty of Democrats I know much better than Tom Brinkman, but you’re not talking about them...)
Yes, somebody got shot at a rally in a high crime neighborhood. Are people who do not live in that neighborhood now afraid?
I do not have a study. And neither do you. Stop your party-line-hack propaganda.
14 Aug 2007 at 07:55 pm | #
Why didn’t CPS use more “green” buildings? Simply put, green buildings are more expensive. And the state doesn’t kick in for those “extras”, so CPS has to pick up the whole tab. Why doesn’t CPS use more natural light? Because the community didn’t want it. They did extensive work with the local community planning groups, and involved them in all stages of the architectural design process. If you don’t like the end result, don’t blame CPS, blame the community members who guided the design.
As to the number of schools planned versus built, you may want to notice that more than 7 years has passed since the plan started. To begin with, the number of students in CPS has dropped since the building program began. If I remember correctly, they lost about 7,000 to 9,000 children in that time frame. If they kept the original number of buildings, they’d have spent money to build schools with no kids. That’s a waste of money.
On the other side, there has been the increase in the cost of steel, copper, and other construction materials. Talk to any construction company, and you’ll hear that construction costs have skyrocketed. So the buildings that they *are* building are much more expensive. Add it all together, and CPS has no choice but to build fewer buildings for the same amount of money.
14 Aug 2007 at 08:22 pm | #
So you and I agree that Brinkman is wrong. People aren’t moving out of the county because of taxes, but because they feel they can find a better value for their money somewhere else or for some other reason up to and including crime. The lack of jobs may be another reason. And I hope you do ask Brinkman that question but I doubt that you will have a chance before you come under his spell and walk out glassy-eyed looking for a gay guy to bash. Maybe he’s slipping you a date rape drug.
Again, you take every opportunity to slip in a slam against democrats. Was that necessary? I don’t hear democrats claiming that we should avoid any and all taxes like Brinkman. Anyway, why would I talk about the Demcrats you know? I don’t know who they are and I think you’re just pulling the some-of-my-best-friends-are-Democrats, ploy by saying that. Though you say you can be civil with those that have different political views, I strongly doubt that would extend to Democrats. At least I’ve seen no evidence of it.
It’s always fun to bat the birdie back and forth with you but seriously, it’s disturbing that you throw your lot in with and promote the agenda of the likes of Brinkman, Blackwell, and the rest of the nationwide movement to destroy the public schools when they’re going down for the third time as it is.
14 Aug 2007 at 08:59 pm | #
I am anti-jail and pro-schools.
I understand that one is the county and the other is the city but it seems to me the city works hard to keep the county supplied with prisoners by under-educating it’s citizens.
If we want to deprive the county of revenue to build a new jail, we should focus on the city educating our little rugrats to keep them out of the county jail.
14 Aug 2007 at 09:11 pm | #
Dean I’m not trying to be a troll or anything, but I need to ask this; aren’t you a former CPS teacher whose employment was terminated by that school system (fairly or unfairly, I’ve no idea what their alleged ‘just cause’ was)? I don’t believe that you can really be objective in this debate.
Again, I’m just asking….
14 Aug 2007 at 10:26 pm | #
This is like a bad car accident - you don’t really want to pry into someone else’s horrors but you can’t resist, you crane your neck to gawk at the site….
15 Aug 2007 at 12:59 am | #
Can anyone explain on what grounds this type of funding was deemed unconstitutional? Which constitution Ohio or U.S.?
If one were truely against this tax and one was backed up by such a court ruling, then the only legitimate form of protest would be to refuse to pay the tax. Voting against a school levy is a meaningless gesture that can only diminish a childs education at most.
So Dean buy a house in Cincy, deduct the CPS portion from your tax bill, and fight it out in the courts. I bet everyone on your blog would be behind you 100%. Teachers would even support you. What other profession is forced derive funding from repeatedly begging taxpayers for money?
15 Aug 2007 at 04:11 am | #
#32:
Not that it is your business, but I have never had my employment terminated by an employer at any time during my life.
Additionally, I have never worked for CPS in any capacity.
whatuptho:
Interesting. What is the punishment for refusing to pay an unconstitutional tax?
15 Aug 2007 at 04:55 am | #
Whatuptho - Those intent on destroying the public schools (in many cases the same folk opposed to a new humane jail because they “claim” they just don’t want more people in jail as if the building, not the social conditions are the problem) will claim this to be a “symbolic” protest when exactly what you pointed out is exposed. All property taxes, would be unconstitutional under their theory. They go after the schools from all fronts. They have a multi-pronged and relentless approach to wear people down and try to convince them that getting rid of public education is beneficial: defiling the teachers, lying, performance, constitutionality, etc. To paraphrase a memorable quote by Kanye West, “COAST hates poor people” and so does everyone that buys into or supports or stays silent about this heinous war against our public schools.
And finally, a person that wouldn’t support the 14th Amendment (to the CONSTITUTION no less) trying to use that very document against yet another vulnerable group is less than moral, it’s criminal.
15 Aug 2007 at 05:01 am | #
cincysue,
What are you talking about? Property taxes in Ohio have NOT been found unconstitutional, but our entire State’s manner of funding public schools HAS been found unconstitutional.
Don’t you see that addressing the school funding formula would make there be better access to equal education for everyone?
Why do you want Ohio to have an unfair taxing system for school funding that aggravates the chasm between those who have, and those who have not?
15 Aug 2007 at 05:03 am | #
And BTW, why do you wish to ignore the fact that our jails are filled with people who do not need to be there? Do you like the idea of imprisoning people needlessly? That is disgusting.
15 Aug 2007 at 07:37 am | #
When they are right—like they are in opposing a jail tax (even if their reason for opposing it are different from mine)—then they are right; and when they are wrong—like when they fabricated an abortion issue against Portune and Pepper—then I call them on that, too.
**********
You know what Dean, you’re wrong about this.
I understand that politics makes strange bedfellows, but the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.
I’ll let you unravel that bundle of clichés because I have to go. But I think if you keep using your reasoning that even people who are supporting your causes for reasons different than your own, you’re going to eventually align yourself with some very disingenuous and wrong minded folks.
15 Aug 2007 at 07:59 am | #
Dean, like it or not, the drug laws and other laws you don’t like that keep people in jail (such as keeping individuals incarcerated if they cannot post bond) were all duly enacted by elected officials. If you don’t like the laws, fine, then vote for someone who will change them. But it’s very republican of you to want to “starve the beast”—-the republicans do it by lowering revenue to eliminate programs they don’t like, and you’re trying to do it by limiting jail space to eliminate jail time for people convicted of laws you don’t like. In the end, it doesn’t solve any problems or even achieve your goal, and it creates other problems in its wake.
But don’t confuse the issue of the jail tax and the school tax. Your children benefited from school levies. I don’t know of a single school district that didn’t pass at least one controversial levy in the last decade or so. And the taxes for those levies were all paid, even by the people who didn’t like the school districts, and your children (in whatever district they are in) got the benefit of those grudgingly paid tax dollars. So don’t you think you owe it to the people who, against their vote, paid for your children’s education? Don’t you have a moral obligation to give back?
15 Aug 2007 at 08:56 am | #
Just moving back to Cinti after 20 years, including the last 5 in a country where parents have to choose WHICH child to send to the public schools, whic are either crude mud-and-stick affairs or basic home-baked brick and the teachers are paid $200 a month. When primary schools were made free in 2003, the average class size went from 40 to 85. Just a bit of context. Also, where the opposition just today guaranteed that they will lose the December 2007 elections because they spend their time tearing each other up rather than uniting against the government. Just a bit of context.
My daughters started at a well-regarded, well-funded public high school in Cinti this week, where it was 102 degrees in the non-air-conditioned classroom. Just a bit of context.
Brinkman and his ilk RELY on good-hearted people tearing each other up while COAST puts together a united agenda to destroy publicly-funded anything at all.
Some proposals.
(1) Let’s work on fixing the funding problem—studying it well enough to know which parts are constitutional, and which parts un, and come up with a plan of action and a proposal.
(2) Let’s assume it will take 5-7 years to accomplish (1).
(3) Let’s ask real questions about how well construction money has been spent, who has benefitted, and where the mistakes are; demand public accountability; whether a reliable study of the conditions of public school buildings has been undertaken, and whether the proposed construction plans are reasonable; and demand public accountability, or propose an alternative strategy.
(4) Let’s do that as friends and allies of the public schools and their students, not as detractors—demanding BETTER public service from our public servants, not seeking to dismiss or dismantle.
(5) Let’s see if anybody has studied what the real problems and real needs of the schools are (XU and UC have huge education departments . . . surely somebody has given this some thought).
(6) Let’s develop that into a manageable 5-year constructive strategy, choosing our battles carefully, solving a manageable number of problems, articulating a few well-chosen, reasonable, and understandable goals.
(7) Let’s put that strategy before the public and before our public servants, and make them respond.
(8) Let’s argue that we’re WILLING to pay property taxes but demand PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY for how they’re used, and insist that we’re friends of the public schools, but not dupes or lackeys.
(9) Let’s agree that there are in fact multiple, overlapping, mutually-reinforcing, and not-entirely-consistent reasons for families moving out, or choosing not to move in. Cincinnati’s poor race relations—black resentment and white contempt—cannot be ignored. My decided to move INTO the city, for the simple reason that we wanted out kids to go to a particular CPS school. Had we decided otherwise, there would have been 3 mutually-reinforcing reasons: crime, housing price, and high property taxes.
(10) Let’s ask somebody who studies such things why families are moving out; XU and UC have sociologists and urban planners and business experts, surely somebody has thought about this.
(11) Let’s develop a manageable, 5-year strategy to alleviate the most important THREE factors, say.
(12) Let’s front candidates for school board, city council, etc. who can articulate and successfully carry out these agendas, with the constructive aim of improving both the schools and the living situation, or at least the city’s image.
Or, let’s just stay on the blog and tear each other up while Tom Brinkman tears up our schools.
Any takers?
15 Aug 2007 at 10:53 am | #
reference #14 above:
?!? says:
14 Aug 2007 at 08:02 am | #
WHAT!
The old CPS buildings “didn’t have anything wrong with them”? Don’t you remember the big expose the Post did on the crumbling schools?
This is an example of the pot calling the kettle black. The writer, obviously ashamed to attach his or her name to the message, accuses Jason (Dean) of not know anything of school or building construction. This person like so many accepts hook, line and sinker whatever propaganda was put out by those that feel little concern over spending everyone else’s money.
Let’s look at the writer’s concerns:
As the summary says, the old building had inadequate ventilation, no sprinkler system, had under-sized classrooms, and was not ADA compliant.
This is a single story building with a wall of windows in each classroom that looks out to a unconcentrated residential area, so how does that mean inadequate ventilation? What is wrong with opening some windows?
Next the question of lacking a sprinkler system. There are two levels of sprinkler protection: one for people to have tine to get out and the other to have increased protection for property. Again this is a single-story building with windows. How much exposure can there be? Perhaps one might just replace one of the windows in each classroom with an emergency exit?
Next it is claimed the building is not ADA compliant! When the entire building deck is only a few inches above ground level, you are 95% of the way to being compliant. For this they want a whole new building? My colleague went to school at Oxford (in England) in a 500 year old building. Which would you have preferred to attend to learn? I hesitate to ask that question of the writer.
When one has to spend one’s money that was hard earned, one usually questions the cost of the benefits that one expects. It is when one can spend someone else’s money that we can be so cavalier.
15 Aug 2007 at 11:26 am | #
Reference #21 above:
cincysue says:
... but I do have a moral obligation to make available to other people what was available to me as a child. A public school education.
I am not obligated to support your so-called moral convictions. Some might refer to your convictions as hang ups.It is apparent that your public education did not prepare you to think and left you with only the ability to parrot what you were told in the public schools. You seem satisfied with the present system because that is all that you were told.
It would probably be the best sex you have ever had but I must decline your offer because I think it bad taste only to come and immediately leave without some conversation. Talking with you would be difficult.
As for myself, I will bet you, say a thou, that I pay more taxes that you by far. And do you not think that Dean and the rest of the renters in this city do not pay taxes? They are included in their rental payments. In fact they may actually pay more because we owners often mark up those taxes to pay our overhead and make a profit, which we deserve as capitalists.
Some sue the government to make the government better. It is a more acceptable method than revolution to get a government to change its ways. It is often needed simply because people like cincysue are complacent and think very deeply. If the herd of which cincysue is a part were more responsible and informed, we might have better elected officials, who were intune with the people and able to govern more efficiently.
As to cincysue’s suspicion that taxpayers are footing the bill for Brinkman’s suit, I think that she may be correct but not in the manner in which she believes nor can even understand. We taxpayers will pay because we don’t demand that our elected officials be accountable.
15 Aug 2007 at 01:45 pm | #
Deb, like wise the enemy of your enemy is not always your enemy. I think this whole enemy mentality is a real problem with the body politic.
What’s wrong with people who often disagree coming together on a common ground issue when they agree? It doesn’t mean you have to make a blood pack and will always work together in the future, it just means you’re mature enough to act like an adult and work with people who think differently than you.
Why must we demonize everybody that disagrees with us? Maybe we should sit down and talk with each other and find as much common ground as possible. Maybe this mentality is our own worst enemy. This might not be a popular thing to say, but we are all just people and nobodies right all the time.
15 Aug 2007 at 04:25 pm | #
Deter - you’re a blithering idiot. Everytime you highlight something I’ve said and try to respond, I sound better and you sound more stupid. Thanks for bringing out my best points again. As far as having sex with you, stick with your usual date: your hand and a picture of that dude Ann Coulter. It’s your only sure bet.
15 Aug 2007 at 11:43 pm | #
Cincysue blurted out: “I’ll always support the schools.”
Thanks for admitting up front that you put absolutely no thought into your votes on levies. It’s all emotional to you. If you support XXX, then you’ll automatically do what your told by the pro-XXX levy crowd and vote for whatever they ask.
If the school board wanted to double your school property taxes, would you vote yes because you “support the schools”, or would you say that’s too much and vote no. If they wanted to triple your school property taxes, would you automatically vote yes to show your support for the schools, or would you vote no along with COAST? If the School Board wanted to increase your property taxes 10x higher than they are now, would you automatically vote yes or is it possible at some point you’d actually put some thought into what you’re voting for?
I’m very suspicious of this sudden announcement that the projected deficit magically ballooned from $5 million to $79 million. Projected deficits don’t just come from nowhere. And where was Finance Committee Chairman Melanie Bates during all this? Let’s hope she doesn’t run our city the way she runs our schools.
16 Aug 2007 at 04:09 pm | #
And furthermore, I didn’t blurt it out. I restated my thoughtful, carefully considered personal commitment to support education though it may come at some personal sacrifice. Certainly more to a moderate income person like myself than many of the wealthy people that cry the loudest because they might not be able to easily budget a second or third $700 designer bag or some other symbol of conspicuous consumption. Waaaaaah. Poor rich people.
16 Aug 2007 at 11:48 pm | #
Sue, so what you’re saying is your thoughtful, carefully considered position is to automatically vote to raise taxes when you’re told to do so. If they wanted to triple your property taxes, you would automatically vote yes because that’s what the school board wants, and it’s not your place to question them.
17 Aug 2007 at 07:53 pm | #
CincyJeff just say what you really mean. You don’t think poor kids should get a public school education.
Also, a comment that I sent before my last one posted somehow disappeared into the netosphere. Most of it was just ranking on Cincy Jeff (is he the one that blogs on county time? can’t remember) but I did pose a scenario to the Dean.
Dean, I don’t have children in school. Any school. Public or private. But I have to pay for those of you that do have children and expect the rest of us to educate them. I suspect that you will want an education for your child, and Brinkman has the same expectation for his brood and I further expect that you and Brinkman will have your hands out for MY tax money be it via public school funding, school vouchers, private schools that manage to get my tax dollars and/or federal and state tax credits and deductions that the rest of us don’t get. And I’m beginning to believe you may be right. Maybe I shouldn’t be responsible for educating yours and Brinkman’s kids. Here’s what I propose and I think it would be fair. Cut the child care credits and in fact all federal and state income tax deductions for children. After all it’s a form of welfare. Adult deductions only. None for children. Why should everybody else be penalized and guys like Brinkman be rewarded for poppin’ out a little tax deduction each year? Those that show restraint and don’t overpopulate should get the credits. Can you feel me on this one Dean? Think COAST would back this kind of plan?