My name is in the newspaper today, in an article entitled, “Kettering Undecided On School Levy Timing.” The article is in the “Neighbors” Section for Kettering and Oakwood and revisits comments made during DDN’s group interview with all five board candidates, September 23. The article says, “One board member seeking reelection, Julie Gilmore, and a challenger, Mike Bock, told the DDN editorial board that Kettering will place a levy on the 2010 ballot.”
At that meeting, I said that, after talking with Board Treasurer, Steve Clark, and Interim Superintendent, Jim Schoenlein, it seemed clear to me that there will need to be a new levy next year and that it looks like the recommendation will be to place 7 mill levy on the ballot next May. Julie Gilmore confirmed my comment that there would probably be a need for a levy next May, but didn’t predict what amount might be needed.
The DDN the next day wrote a short article that said Steve Clark verified that a levy, of uncertain amount, will be needed sometime next year. Today’s article indicates that Clark has “backed away” from his previous statement to the DDN.
My point is that the district must have more transparency with Kettering voters and that if, as appears obvious to me, there will be a need for new local property taxes next year in Kettering to fund the schools, then the time to have that discussion in now, during the election of new board members.
During the DDN group interview, I appreciated the fact that Julie Gilmore took a stand and verified my levy prediction. The DDN today quotes her as saying, during our group interview, “He (CLark) said we are running out of money and it looks like we’re going to have to go with new money in 2010 based on the five-year forecast.” As I reported, I felt that Gilmore, overall, of the three incumbents running for reelection, during that DDN interview, seemed the most informed, the most analytical.
Certainly the other current board members, Frank Maus and George Bayless, have heard the same information as Gilmore, but, they were not as forthright. It seems to me, Maus and Bayless must feel their chance for reelection will be harmed if news of the new levy becomes part of the election campaign.
Maus, in the DDN article, comes across as attempting to deflect discussion. Maus is quoted as saying, “We have not been approached by the administration. We have not been formally told that we need to have a levy.”
“Formally told” — I’m not sure what that means, but it sounds like Frank is attempting to side-step the question. Whether “formally told” or not, certainly Maus heard the same five year forecast as Gilmore. I hope Frank, the next time he gets a chance, will be more forthright. I’ve known Frank for years, and as I said in an earlier post, I have a lot of confidence in him. He seemed a little flat-footed, however, concerning this issue at the DDN interview.
George Bayless is quoted in today’s DDN article as saying, “We haven’t specifically talked about any levy.” But Bayless also confirmed, “That’s what the five-year forward looking plan says we will need.”
It seems to me that on the issue of the need for a new levy, of the three incumbents, Maus should be in a stronger position than Gilmore or Bayless because, last May, Maus and Board President, Jim Trent, voted “No” to approving a new Kettering teachers’ contract giving the teachers a 3% raise over two years (1.5% each year for two years). Gilmore and Bayless voted in favor of the raise, along with board member, Lori Simms, and the teachers’ pay increase was approved by a vote of 3-2. Part of the reason why Kettering is facing a budget shortfall is because of this new teachers’ contract. During the DDN interview, Maus said that in his view, giving the teachers a raise, during a time when so many voters are facing economic troubles, would be seen by voters as a “kick in the teeth.”
All five candidates participated in a videotaped program this week with League of Women Voters that will be shown on cable starting next week. At that taping, I said I agreed with the “No” vote made by Frank Maus and Board President, Jim Trent, concerning giving the teachers a raise. I am all in favor of teachers being as well paid as possible. After all, I retired from teaching and I have great respect for the work that teachers do. But, again, the issue is transparency. Kettering voters have a right to know how their board candidates view all of these issues.
The board voted for the teachers’ pay increase just days after the community voted to renew a 6.9 mill levy last May, and the point I attempted to make at the LWV taping is that during that 6.9 mill renewal levy campaign there was not a peep of information available to the general public that by voting for the levy, voters were approving a raise for teachers.
I’m glad the DDN ran their article today. In my judgment, Kettering’s New Levy Need, Teachers’ Pay Raise, Should Be Discussed As Part Of Board Election Campaign
Mike, do you think any candidates running for board actually believe that, by mandating full-day kindergarten, Ohio will experience an economic revival which will result in state tax revenues sufficient to address school funding needs? Just what parts of our Governor’s “constitutional, transformational education roadmap to economic revival” are going to fix the economy?
BTW, in the news:
All of this confusion leaves districts trying their best to continually adapt forecasts and budgets throughout the year.
BTW, in the news (link fixed…):
All of this confusion leaves districts trying their best to continually adapt forecasts and budgets throughout the year.
I agree with you in regards to having a respect for educators, but I also agree with Maus’s no vote. Sorry, teachers, but it appears the majority of the working force are experiencing pay freezes and in all publically funded organizatitaxpayer’ssituatis situations should be reflected in the budgeting of the institution. We are all tightening our belts and it’s clear the schools need to do the same. As they come at as again this May for a 6.9 mill levy to begin collecting next year, why aren’t they showing us where they’re cutting back? Sure, you get what you pay for, but do our residents not realize we are on par with the city of Dayton in terms of income tax rates (no one’s is higher) and our property taxes are bleeding most of us dry. Yet, the residents turn out every year voting yes…yes…yes to whatever they ask for. I can’t help but wonder if the voters have any idea what they’re doing with their money. And since it only effects home owners directly, I truly hope renters stay out of that vote or at the very least, their landlords increase their rent by at least $50.00 each month, which is what the rest of us will shell out when it passes. And it will…with no questions asked.