Editor Nikki Ferrell firstname.lastname@example.org
2:12 pm on Friday, May 24, 2013
It's all part of the misdirection masquerading as information that the LFC and BOE are putting into the public realm.
The bond levy relates to taxes. Period. *All* that other stuff is smoke and mirrors.
Except that a state approved Comprehensive Plan is required for the 14% Phase I matching funds, and for *any* hope of funding Phase Ii in 7 - 10 years.
Please read my blog post, linked above, for the details.
12:53 pm on Friday, May 24, 2013
I'll offer an opinion on nearly any topic.
But I don't tell anyone how to raise their kids, as I've never done it.
Makes me wonder about clergy that is confident it can.
6:37 pm on Thursday, May 23, 2013
The Phase I bond levy is constrained by the district's borrowing limits. That $ figure *will* go down by $50 MILLION or so after 2013. Our district's depressed property values, plus the state's formulas, finally catch up with us.
The Phase II bond levy is constrained not by our borrowing limits, but by the $ value of the Comprehensive Plan that the state approves, provided we get the *additional* approval in 7 - 10 years.
I hope this is helpful to you.
I'll be happy to share whatever I know with you. It is my belief that data and information become *more* valuable, the more they are shared.
I'm not hard to contact. My e-mail is my full name at yahoo. And I'm on fb.
6:36 pm on Thursday, May 23, 2013
Since I *think* you are a real CH resident, it is my pleasure to bring information to you in a way you can use it.
Rather than give my opinions as answers to your very valid questions and concerns, I will give a factual answer to just one: "So, my question is, why wait 7-10 years to close them? or even 1 year?"
And even then, I'm really answering this question, which is different than the one you asked: "Why won't Phase II - The Elementary Schools - be addressed until 7 - 10 years down the road?"
I answered that question pro-actively on April 13th in this blog:
Because the LFC and the BOE have *never* once clearly spelled this out. Here's a portion of my explanation from that blog:
The school district needs a state approved Comprehensive Plan for two reasons:
• To get a 14% match from the state for Phase I.
• And to be eligible, with *additional* state approval, to borrow the rest of the $ that the Comprehensive Plan requires.
That *additional* approval, and the ability to pass a bond levy for Phase II, if it comes at all, is estimated by the LFC to be 7 - 10 years away. Because we're 522nd on the state's waiting list of school districts!
3:29 pm on Thursday, May 23, 2013
The LFC was volunteers appointed by the BOE .
But it was the usual suspects. By invitation only. No applicants were on the committee, only people who were "nominated".
11:24 am on Thursday, May 23, 2013
I don't understand what detail you are referring to.
Also, only three buildings are being renovated if this bond levy passes.
I exclude the SWG from my criticisms of the LFC.
7:02 am on Thursday, May 23, 2013
Last night, my hope was to get the ball rolling in terms of citizen involvement, with the intention of broadening the circle going forward. Again, I apologize for aggravating you in the process and hope this won't prevent your participation from here on out.
Our Passion: Excellent Public Education
1991 Lee Rd., #106, Cleveland Heights, OH 44118
Thank you for the prompt and thoughtful reply.
Yes, please add me to the list. I want to be part of the solution. And I, too, believe that the more people engaged in the discussion, the better the solution will be.
6:59 am on Thursday, May 23, 2013
Aw, what the heck. Here's the beginning of my e-mail exchange with Patrick, edited only by removing phone #s.
This is part of why I was stunned to *not* be selected for the LFC.
Due to Patch limitations, Patrick's response will be broken into two posts, with my response following on the 2nd one.
--- On Thu, 8/2/12, Patrick Mullen <email@example.com> wrote:
From: Patrick Mullen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Got your message
Date: Thursday, August 2, 2012, 12:02 PM
Last night was an initial planning meeting. As a starting point, I invited anyone who indicated at the last few public facilities meeting that they wanted to help move the process forward. I will be happy to send you the notes from last night as soon as I get them and to add your name to those who want to be part of the conversation. One challenge we have is to come up with a more successful public engagement process than we had last year. I apologize for failing in that regard with you. The next important meeting is next Tuesday when the Board of Education meets (BoE building on Miramar, 7pm) to discuss what action they want to take on facilities. As things stand now, they delayed putting a bond issue on the ballot, but are still on record as supporting Plan C (grades 9-12 at Heights High, 4-8 at Monticello, Roxboro, Wiley, PreK-3 at a new Boulevard and renovated Canterbury, Oxford and Roxboro).
(Due to Patch limitations, Patrick's response will be broken into two posts, with my response following on the 2nd one.)
Advertise on Patch and reach potential customers in your backyard and beyond. Click here for more information.
Learn more »
If you want to help local causes, or your cause needs local help, your next click should be right here.
Learn more »
Cleveland Heights news, events, and deals sent to you daily and breaking news as it happens.
See more options
You’re now signed up!
Enter your tip here and it will be sent straight to
Amanda Harnocz, Nikki Ferrell, Mitch Cooper, Megan Rozsa, and Chris Mazzolini,
Cleveland Heights Patch's (incredibly grateful)