From the Buckeye Institute:

OEA Employees Strike

In the too good to be true category, check out this video (http://bit.ly/doZcUo) from our news bureau about a strike by OEA employees against the OEA. Looks like the infamous greed of corporations has made its way to the boardrooms of America's unions.

Published: Thursday, September 2, 2010

To the Editor:

Back to school is quickly approaching and as parents watch for sales to replenish backpacks and dorm rooms, I would like to ask the Worthington City School District to make some proactive decisions about how the district's budgets will look in the future.

Truly, everyone realizes that a levy every two years is not good fiscal policy, nor is it a feasible option. On the same line of thinking, parents, students and teachers will need to start visualizing a different type of district. The education will be the same, but the student populations in each building will look different -- unless a levy every two years is in your budget.

My greatest hope is that the school district will begin a dialogue with the community and review the options available. This process cannot be rushed. It should not cost thousands of dollars for consultants, and it should use the resources that we have available within our district.

The next three to five years can bring about different housing for our students but the same quality education, or it can literally destroy our excellent education and sense of community because of bickering and less-than-transparent practices used to balance the budget. The outcome will directly affect our students -- our children. It is up to the community, and the burden is on the Worthington City School District to lead the way.

Kathleen Murphy

Wednesday, September 1, 2010 By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Community Newspapers

The Worthington schools will receive about $500,000 in federal Race to the Top money, but don't expect it go far in delaying the next operating levy.

The money must be directed to government-directed initiatives, the details of which the district was to learn during a Webinar set for Wednesday, Sept. 1.

A committee of educators will determine how the money would be used, based on what is learned.

"Obviously, we are excited. We are pleased to receive funding to support initiatives we want to move forward," Superintendent Melissa Conrath said.

She said she expects the funds to support a need for professional development to help teachers prepare for newly-written state standards and assessments. Also to be supported is the district's efforts to use data to impact instruction. Both are initiatives deemed important by the state and federal government.

Federal American Recovery & Reinvestment Act money granted last year already has been used to develop an online system that allows teachers to learn about the performance of individual students, she said.

Besides the Race to the Top funds, the district received nearly $2-million in ARRA money to be used this year and next, district treasurer Jeff McCuen said. It may be used for operations, he said.

In addition, Worthington will receive an estimated $721,973 from the federal government to be used over the next two years to keep teachers from losing their jobs. All of the federal dollars probably wouldn't be enough to keep the district off the ballot next year, though, McCuen said. That will be determined by Ohio's next biennium budget, he said, and he is not expecting the news from the state to be encouraging.

He said he expects that the five-year financial forecast he prepares in May will indicate the need for a levy next year, just as he predicted months ago. "I am thinking it will be in November of 2011 at this point," he said.

Mary McCleary Policy Analyst

mmccleary@buckeyeinstitute.org

Many school districts around the state are facing deep budget cuts due to failed levies in the May primary. Now school districts must make the tough choices and make ends meet. More often than not that means students will bear the brunt of school budget crises through fewer opportunities and larger class sizes. From laying off teachers to cutting sports and fine arts programs, almost nothing is off the table – except teacher compensation.

Gahanna-Jefferson School District illustrates this problem perfectly. This past May, the Gahanna-Jefferson school district asked voters for a 9-mill operating levy. This levy would have raised yearly property taxes by $312 for each $100,000 in home value. For example, those owning a home worth $325,000 would have paid an extra $1,014 per year in property taxes. By a slim margin, the voters said no.

Because the Gahanna-Jefferson levy failed, the district cut two administrator jobs, 15 teacher positions, 11 non-certified positions, and 12 alternative instructor positions. There are also talks of cutting funds from the transportation, technology, and textbook budgets. Additionally, to help cover the costs of athletics, the district will start implementing pay-to-play fees in 2011. If the next levy does not pass, these sports fees could soar up to $500.

All of the budget cuts have one thing in common: they hurt the kids. This approach is little more than emotional blackmail. There is no denying that school budgets must be balanced. However, in order to successfully balance the budget without cutting services to vulnerable populations, teacher compensation simply cannot be taken off the table.

For the 2008-2009 school year, the average Gahanna-Jefferson teacher earned $67,494 for working 1,350 hours. Prorated to the standard full work year of 2,080 hours, the average teacher salary was $103,991. Surprisingly, the average physical education instructor in Gahanna schools earned $71,898 during 2008-2009, or $110,776 when prorated to the full work year. These high figures do not even take into account retirement packages, sick pay, or benefits.

Over and over again, Gahanna-Jefferson has failed to restrain spending. Between 1998 and 2009, the number of students in the district rose a mere 5.5 percent, but the per pupil cost increased 80 percent from $6,595 to $11,289, far outpacing inflation which was only 29 percent over the 11 year period. Similarly, teacher pay increased by 44 percent from $46,733 to $67,494 between 2001 and 2009 while inflation was only 21 percent.

Had the average teacher salary increased with the rate of inflation from 2001 to 2009, Gahanna-Jefferson schools would have saved $5,002,779 in 2009 alone. Instead of having to cut $2.5 million from the budget, the school district would have run a $2.5 million surplus.

When a school district asks for more money, taxpayers have the chance to examine spending and decide whether an increase in funding is warranted. If the school district is not restraining costs or if it is spending money frivolously, the taxpayers can decline levy requests and send a clear message to the school district that it needs to make do with the resources it has been given. Thus, district residents can hold their schools accountable – for now.

The 2009 Ohio Budget created a new kind of levy: the conversion levy. If passed, this levy would create a permanent, indefinite increase in property taxes and consequently in school revenues. Had a conversion levy been passed in 1998, Gahanna schools would have collected an additional $19,817,129 in revenue between 1998 and 2008 without the district ever having to go back to the voters. Fundamentally, the conversion levy removes the best accountability measure taxpayers have to keep their school districts in check.

By cutting various programs to save money, school districts continue to nibble on the margins without making any real strides toward solving the systemic funding crisis created by ever-increasing gold-plated compensation packages for school district employees, including double-dipping administrators. If school districts truly want to rein in spending, they must be willing to take on the entrenched interests of the teacher union and tell administrators the gravy train has come to an end.

While teachers and administrators continue to receive salary increases that far outpace the rate of inflation, many of their private sector neighbors are taking pay cuts, losing jobs, and struggling to make ends meet. It is patently unfair to saddle these folks with higher property taxes at a time when we are in the worst single decade for investors since the 1830s just so teachers can be compensated at a level that is totally out of touch with economic reality.

Published: Saturday, July 10, 2010, 4:00 AM Updated: Saturday, July 10, 2010, 10:46 AM Thomas Ott, The Plain Dealer

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Cleveland teachers would give up an estimated $17 million in concessions under a tentative contract, but would limit pay cuts and protect seniority rights that were targeted by Chief Executive Officer Eugene Sanders.

The three-year agreement, a copy of which was obtained Friday by The Plain Dealer, also would return to the payroll many of the more than 660 union members who were laid off last month. The exact number has not been determined.

The district's nearly 3,900 teachers would give up three paid training days, or 1.5 percent of their salaries, below the 4.6 percent Sanders had demanded. They also would forgo reimbursement for voluntary training, delay step increases until the last quarter of the school year and pay higher health-care premiums.

"It's a decent contract," union spokeswoman Tracy Radich said. "The reality is there are tough economic times for everybody."

Sanders was adamant that he wanted to weaken, even gut, seniority in job assignments, calling the flexibility key to his new academic "transformation plan." Districts around the country are exploring labor agreements that would give principals more control over who works in their buildings. Related stories

* Tentative agreement reached on teachers contract (July 5) * Teachers union wins arbitration ruling (July 2) * More coverage of education * Coverage of Cleveland Schools transformation plan

Highlights of contract

Highlights of the tentative three-year agreement reached by the Cleveland Teachers Union and the Cleveland School District:

• Delays salary step increases.

• Eliminates three paid training days.

• Keeps teacher seniority rights.

• Increases health-care premi ums.

• Acknowledges union's right to organize district-affiliated charter schools.

• Gives teachers a voice in implementing district's "transformation plan."

• Continues to allow teachers to remove disruptive students from class.

• Calls for collaboration in developing new teacher evaluation system.

Sanders' spokesman, John Hairston, downplayed the retreat on seniority, saying the district was more interested in wiping out a deficit once forecast at nearly $54 million. The savings from the teachers' contract brings the district close to that figure and avoids cuts that would swell the size of some classes to 45 students.

"The biggest concern we had was putting people back in the classroom," Hairston said. "I don't see it as a setback."

Teachers will vote on the contract from July 21-23 and July 26-28. The school board will schedule a ratification vote before the end of the month.

The agreement could be reopened on economic issues in the second and third years, when the district expects to face mounting financial problems. The strain has stirred talk of a new operating levy, something the schools have not seen since 1996.

The teachers' previous contract expired June 30 but was reopened a year ago, after the administration exercised its option to cancel 3 percent raises. Negotiations began early this year but quickly hit a wall.

Union leaders said Sanders simply refused to bargain, while Sanders replied that he would talk when there was something to talk about.

Negotiations resumed three weeks ago at the urging of Mayor Frank Jackson, who worried that a lingering dispute would interfere with execution of the transformation plan, starting in August. The agreement was announced Monday.

The tentative agreement calls for increased collaboration, something the union had complained was in short supply. For example, teachers will get seats on district and school transformation committees, helping with reforms that are tailored to each building.

District officials and teachers also will develop a new teacher evaluation system, another hot-button issue nationwide. The system will get a trial run in at least 10 schools during the 2010-11 school year but results from the pilot can't be used to dismiss teachers, Radich said.

Sanders, as part of his reform plan, had told more than 600 teachers at poor-performing schools to reapply for positions with the district. But in a binding decision, an arbitrator last week ruled that the order, affecting 14 elementary schools and eight high schools, violated the union's old contract.

Radich said the union will work with the district to reassign up to half the teachers in eight of the schools. The district has to replace the teachers to receive up to $27 million in federal funds over three years.

The newfound spirit of cooperation rated a mention at the American Federation of Teachers convention that will conclude Sunday in Seattle. Leaders of the Cleveland union are in attendance."

"We're often faced with the uninformed attitude that collectively bargained contracts themselves are the obstacle to making schools better, rather than the understanding that collective bargaining is a process where our voices, together, help improve schools, other public services and communities." AFT President Randi Weingarten said in a convention speech.

"We've increasingly been able to use collective bargaining as a creative tool to codify collaborative approaches that improve teaching and learning," she said, citing Cleveland as the latest example.

Sanders' plan calls for letting charter schools run some district buildings. Under the proposed labor agreement, contracts with district-sponsored charters would have to acknowledge the union's right to organize the charter school teachers.

The union already has the right to organize the schools, so the provision is largely symbolic. John Zitzner, among several charter-school operators who are seeking closer ties with the district, has been cool to the idea of using union teachers.

"Nobody has been able to show how organizing our teachers would better serve our children," he said.

Published: Wednesday, July 7, 2010

To the Editor:

In a world of often bleak news, there were two bright spots in the "Letters to the Editor" section recently (Worthington News, June 23).

First, past Worthington Board of Education member and union apologist Abramo Ottolenghi wrote, "... since salaries and benefits are the largest (by far) expenditures of the district, no real savings can be achieved without looking at those expenditures."

Educate Worthington and many others have stated this fact for many years and have been roundly criticized as teacher-haters who don't care about children or their education. Abramo should be careful what he says publicly, or he could suffer the same fate -- even if he is right. Hopefully, he will soon point out the connection between those expensive union contracts -- the real 800-pound gorilla -- and the deep cuts the students and the Worthington program will suffer if we don't fundamentally change those contracts, and soon.

The second bright spot was Dick Graham's letter, as a shining example of the name-calling the community has come to expect from the union and education advocates who think the more you give the union, the better the students will do. Thankfully, he at least boldly admits a fundamental truth that the union doesn't want us to remember: It is the students and their parents who have the greatest influence on academic performance -- period.

He should also know by now that Olentangy delivers an equal or superior product on far smaller union salaries.

Cheryl Shirk

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Public employees who retire to begin collecting their public pension, then are rehired in their old position and collect a public salary on top of their pension, argue that they're not costing the taxpayers anything extra, even when these arrangements result in million-dollar payouts.

But, as Ohio's public pensions slide toward insolvency and the state's budget deficit grows more alarming, the public will be less and less tolerant of this so-called double-dipping.

Defenders of double-dipping argue that if the public employer weren't paying the retiree to do the job, it would be paying somebody else, also at taxpayers' expense, so there's no real difference. This argument has merit, though it should be pointed out that if the retiree is rehired at or above his ending salary, then he probably is being paid much more than a replacement would have received - meaning that taxpayers are, indeed, spending more than they need to.

But the most important aspect of double-dipping is what makes it possible in the first place: the generous early retirement ages afforded by public-employee pensions. Some public employees can retire with full benefits at age 48, while in the private sector, where fewer and fewer employees have pensions, full benefits often are not available until at least age 65.

Not only do these early retirement ages encourage double-dipping and allow most public retirees to draw pensions for many more years than their private-sector counterparts, retiring well before 65 means the retirees need health-care coverage until Medicare kicks in. Although state law doesn't require it, Ohio's public pension plans began offering health-care coverage in the 1970s. Retirees now demand coverage, and its soaring cost is one of several reasons the pension plans are less and less financially sound.

An investigation by Ohio's eight largest newspapers into double-dipping, published Sunday, highlighted some of the most extreme outcomes, involving school-district superintendents. Their relatively high salaries, combined with the perverse incentives of the State Teachers Retirement System, lead many to "retire" early, because it can mean a seven-figure paycheck when they finally stop working.

A superintendent earning $100,000 who retires at age 52 would receive about $64,000 from his pension the first year. He can be rehired in the same job at his last salary and continue to receive raises each year.

No wonder a fourth of Ohio superintendents are collecting pensions along with their paychecks. They're joined by half of the superintendents of educational service centers. Double-dipping instantly increases their incomes by as much as 80 percent.

Teachers, police officers, firefighters and bureaucrats might not rack up numbers quite as high, but the same double-dipping incentives apply.

Taxpayers, many of whom face pay cuts or freezes and diminished retirement prospects in their private-sector jobs, can't be expected to support the current system without change. Managers of the public pension funds should make the necessary changes, however difficult and unpopular, to bring them in line with private-sector plans. Change is needed, not only to ensure continued taxpayer support but to address the growing funding imbalances.

The teachers' system currently has $40 billion in unfunded liabilities and will be looking to taxpayers for at least a partial bailout.

Already, local governments, including school systems, spend $4.1 billion per year to pay for pensions. The Ohio Retirement Study Council would like to see "employer contributions" - taxpayer contributions - raised to the point that they would total $5billion annually.

That's an unrealistic expectation to have of taxpayers.

Instead, pension managers should require employees to pay more into their retirement, raise the retirement age and, ultimately, shift newly hired public employees to a 401(k)-style retirement system. Retirees also will have to shoulder more of their health-care burden.

The status quo isn't sustainable.

Sunday, June 20, 2010 02:58 AM

The recessionary squeeze that many school districts' teachers are feeling in salary negotiations is inevitable.

It also is a sign that school districts and teachers unions are facing the reality that they can't make it through year after year of state-budget deficits that depress their state aid, nor expect financially exhausted voters to continue approving new school taxes, without touching the one area that typically consumes more than three-quarters of their budgets.

Public-school teachers in Ohio long have been able to count on generous raises each year. Beyond any negotiated across-the-board yearly increases, most teachers-union contracts include "step" increases at several stops on the seniority scale, as well as for acquiring more education and professional credentials. These days, school funding for many districts essentially is flat, but maintaining a flat budget is exceedingly difficult when the majority of it carries locked-in increases of 6 percent and more.

Districts already have felt the impact; school boards balance budgets by leaving jobs un-

filled, making classes bigger, cutting busing and eliminating programs not mandated by state regulations.

Many districts now have reached the point at which teacher pay no longer can remain untouched.

Last year, uphill efforts to win voter approval of operating levies prompted teachers, along with administrators and nonteaching employees, in South-Western City Schools to forgo scheduled raises for the 2009-10 school year. Step increases remained in place. Worthington City Schools teachers agreed to freeze base salaries in the 2011-12 school year.

In January, teachers and support staff in Reynoldsburg City Schools followed suit, accepting a freeze on raises and step increases through the 2010-11 school year.

This year, teachers in 10 of 16 Franklin County districts will begin negotiations for new contracts. The dire condition of the state budget, combined with property-tax revenues depressed by the weak housing market of recent years, means they can't expect the salary growth that has been common in the past.

Parents value the people who teach their children, but many of those parents and other taxpayers have lost jobs, can't find a job or have taken pay freezes or cuts. From their perspective, even a skimpy raise sounds pretty good.

Published: Wednesday, June 9, 2010

To the Editor:

Just after the November 2009 election, Educate Worthington wrote:

"Unfortunately, the cumulative cost of many years of 5 percent to 6 percent average raises, nearly free health insurance, taxpayer-funded health care deductibles and extremely generous retirement packages cannot be offset by a partial salary freeze every 16 years. In fact, the new five-year forecast proves this by showing that even after taking these 'freezes' into account, the district still projects ever larger levies in 2012 and 2014 -- or sooner."

It appears that the "sooner" has now arrived.

According to a recent school board meeting, a new operating levy is being considered to appear on the ballot as early as 2011. This will have the interesting implication of requesting a new levy before the previous one is fully collected -- if you recall, the last installment of the previous levy, 1.5 mills, goes into effect for 2011. As far as we know, this is unprecedented in Ohio.

While the size of this new levy has not yet been determined, we do know that there will be over $15 million in cuts through 2014, according to the newest forecast. $15 million, coincidentally, is the same amount in cuts that some in the levy campaign, the union and the school board regularly circulated in order to pass the 2009 levy.

Are salary and benefit costs being "cut?" No. The projected increase in salary spending for 2012 through 2014 is approximately 2.3 percent, 2.4 percent and 3.4 percent, respectively. And you might also note that despite the union's offer of "0 percent base raises" for 2012, the salary budget still increases nearly $2 million, in large part due to the automatic step raises that are unaffected. And as for health care, these costs alone are projected to rise 13 percent per year.

The administration and board indicated that they will have to "prepare the community" for the impending cuts -- and the need to ask for more money sooner than expected. Perhaps they should also consider "preparing the union" to share more fully and fairly in any sacrifices that our students and our residents may face.

Oh, and as for the two-year levy cycle? It will continue into the foreseeable future until one of two things happens: either there is a fundamental change in the spending on salaries and benefits, or we move toward a one-year levy cycle.

John Herrington

co-founder, EducateWorthington

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

To the editor:

At the May 7 and May 10 Worthington board of education meetings, statements were made by board member Charlie Wilson that at best tell only part of the story.

In an exchange with board president Marc Schare he said that he was tired of the constant attacks on teachers' salaries and the salary scale. He then stated that in 2003 Worthington's salary schedule was second from the highest in the 16 school districts in central Ohio, had fallen to ninth in 2009 and is now eighth.

However, in the March 5, 2010, edition of Columbus Business First in its public school analysis list of the 49 school districts in the central Ohio region, Worthington, with an average teacher salary of $68,355, was fourth only to Upper Arlington at $70,164, Bexley at $71,655 and barely below Grandview at $68,989. Still, those other three school systems have less total students combined than Worthington, which leads to the conclusion that Worthington has the greatest number of highest paid teachers of the school districts in central Ohio.

Further, a larger school district, Olentangy Local, has an average salary of $55,955, which is 18 percent lower than Worthington's average salary, although both school systems produce similar excellent results.

Glenn Karr, Worthington

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Teachers unions and their Democrat enablers need this reality check: Taxpayers simply can't afford perpetual increases in public education funding.

In Washington, Education Secretary Arne Duncan predicts "catastrophe" (read: unionized teacher layoffs) if states don't get another $23 billion. That's on top of the stimulus bill's $100 billion for education.

In Harrisburg, the Pennsylvania State Education Association forecasts "disaster" unless Gov. Ed Rendell gets the $354 million hike in education spending in his budget proposal. That would replace Pennsylvania's share of that $100 billion -- and spare PSEA members cuts that the stimulus money's one-time nature should dictate.

It's as if federal K-12 spending hasn't doubled since 2000. And as if the private sector, which has lost 7.4 percent of jobs, hasn't suffered far worse during the recession than the public sector, which has lost fewer than 1 percent of jobs.

Sooner or later, Democrats must drop their fantasy-land approach to public education. Taxpayers who have to live within their means can't perpetually foot the bill for the unionized educratic establishment which doesn't.

Published: Wednesday, June 9, 2010

To the Editor:

Paying property tax to support good schools is just one more thing a homeowner does to maintain their property. Even if one never uses the schools, the investment pays for itself when selling the home.

The median home sale price in Worthington has increased between $30,000 and $50,000 over the last 10 years, and that is after the recent market downturn. Even at the low end, that is an average increase of $3,000 per year.

When the current levy reaches the full 6.9 mills, the median homeowner in Worthington will be paying $35 a month for the levy. In return, the $3,000-plus annual increase in the value of the median Worthington home is a great return on this small investment.

In comparison, over that same period, the median home sale price in Columbus dropped between $15,000 and $25,000. The number of Worthington home sales is down about 15 percent, but still remains strong. Columbus home sales are down about 50 percent. The Worthington school taxes clearly are not scaring away potential buyers. (trulia.com)

Worthington's diligence has paid off. When the current levy reaches full force in 2012, the Worthington school tax rate will only be 7.4 mills above Columbus's current rate. That is a bargain for the quality of our schools.

And quality schools attract homebuyers. Our family moved to Worthington two years ago for the neighborhood schools. Our process of identifying which homes to consider purchasing began with: (1) where are the good schools, (2) which suburbs are not too far.

These two constraints limited our search to properties in Worthington and Upper Arlington. And that was before we even looked at a single house. Many homebuyers with children follow a similar decision path, and that is why Worthington homes are in demand and property values are increasing.

Worthington property taxes depend more on home value than a few mills of a school levy. Our quality schools are in demand, and thus our property values go up.

Benjamin Coifman

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

To the editor:

I can't be as pessimistic as board member Marc Schare, whose attributed statement that the Worthington school district is about to "fall off a cliff" has sparked controversy. However, the future for education in Ohio, and therefore in Worthington, too, is certainly less than bright.

Schare is right in that serious challenges present themselves tothe district. He is equally right in pointing out that, since salaries and benefits are the largest (by far) expenditures of the district, no real savings can be achieved without looking at those expenditures.

I also believe that board member Charlie Wilson, who described the reality of Worthington's salary schedule in relation to those of competing districts, was echoing Woody Hayes' reportedly saying, "You win with people." This is true for any organization, especially one that is so people-d pendent as a school district.

Although I do not wish to pass judgment on the issues relating to the Perry to McCord transfer, it seems to me that all board members are right when they point out that all options have to be considered when trying to preserve and improve the educational program within the economic and other constraints. Among the constraints mentioned by Schare is that some parents will always object to this or that strategic move.  Finally, listening to the audio-file of the last board meeting, I found that it was left to board member David Bressman to mention the 500-pound gorilla in the room: the dismal fiscal situation of Ohio. A projected deficit of 7-8 billion dollars can't but negatively affect the state's contribution to education. Couple that deficit with the elimination of the tangible property tax that supplied the district with a large part of its income, and the outcome becomes evident. Because of the national recession and poor economic growth in Ohio, the Commercial Activities Tax (CAT), which supposedly was to replace the repealed tax, came in at a much lower rate than projected.

Wilson is right when he says that for all our sakes we should be interested in keeping the Worthington school district a "District of Choice." A district where young parents want to move for the education of their children, a district where those of us whose children are gone, choose to stay, and, finally, a district where good teachers, both young and experienced, choose to come to work. It will not be easy and it will take all of us to make it happen.

Abramo Ottolenghi

Monday, June 7, 2010 02:54 AM By Charlie Boss THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Teachers and other school employees have felt the impact of a dismal economy. Jobs have gone unfilled, class sizes have expanded and there's no money for training and supplies.

But after years of tightening their belts, school districts now are reaching into the bulk of their expenses - salaries and benefits - to curb costs. Across the state and nation, more school boards and unions are settling on one- to two-year contracts with cost-of-living increases from zero to 1.5 percent, officials say.

"We've hit the point in the recession where, basically, most states are in the third year," said Michael Griffith, finance expert with the Education Commission of the States, based in Denver.

"In the first year, school districts have cut on the edges," he said. "In year two, districts have made deep cuts but held teachers harmless. Now, in year three, the only thing left is teacher salaries."

Last month, teachers unions in the Gahanna-Jefferson and Pickerington districts agreed to extend contracts through the 2010-11 school year with no increases to base salaries. (Teachers will still get step increases, which are awarded for experience and level of education.)

Dublin board members recently OK'd a three-year pact with the Dublin Educators' Association with raises ranging from 1 percent to 1.5 percent. The previous contract with the teachers union lasted for two years and included 3 percent raises in both years.

Also:

• In January, Reynoldsburg's two employee unions accepted a freeze on raises and step increases next school year.

• Last year, Worthington teachers agreed to freeze base salaries in the 2011-12 school year.

• In March, Columbus City Schools' nonteaching employees negotiated 1.7percent and 1.85 percent raises in a new two-year contract that has them taking more risk on their health-care costs.

Ten of 16 Franklin County school districts have union pacts expiring this year. Talks have started in the Bexley, Canal Winchester, Dublin, Groveport-Madison, Hamilton, South-Western and Westerville districts.

"It's just a sign of the times," Hilliard Treasurer Brian Wilson said. "All the districts are facing financial difficulties and are looking at what their communities can afford. That will certainly be an issue for us, as well."

Contracts for Hilliard's two employee unions are up Dec. 31.

The financial challenges have led to contract disputes in some districts.

Cleveland teachers protested last month over the lack of progress on a new contract. The school board decided to lay off about 800 employees, including 546 teachers, to help stave off a $53 million deficit. District leaders said teachers can limit job losses by agreeing to concessions, such as wage cuts, but the union has refused.

It's foreshadowing for what's to come in Ohio as districts and unions get deeper into negotiations, said Van Keating, who oversees policy and labor work for districts at the Ohio School Boards Association.

"You aren't going to see any seriousness of the struggle now," he said. "Where that is going to come into play is the start of the school year."

He said school leaders are aware of contract settlements elsewhere, especially when unions forgo raises.

Giving up a cost-of-living raise is not something educators take lightly, said Carla Fultz, president of the Pickerington Education Association.

"We call the zero the gift that keeps on giving," she said. "You don't get the percentage we lost back. In better economic times, we would have gotten a 2 or 3percent raise. The next time you negotiate, you're not going to get 6 percent."

She said this is the third time the union agreed to forgo cost-of-living raises in the 18 years she's been in the district.

Pickerington board members are trying to decide how much money to seek in a November levy request. Adding to the uncertainty is a projected $3.4 million drop in state funding for both the 2011-12 and 2012-13 school years because of the loss of federal stimulus money.

"It's very easy to see the handwriting on the wall and the difficulty the district is in," Fultz said. "It's really clear to us that now is not an appropriate time to ask for anything."

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

To the editor:

I'm very disappointed in Worthington school district board member Charlie Wilson's statement in last week's edition. He said, "In 2003 Worthington's salary schedule was second from the highest of the 16 districts in central Ohio and by 2009 it had fallen to ninth." There he goes again comparing apples to oranges.

According to the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) there are only five similar districts in central Ohio. "Similar" districts are identified by ODE by grouping districts based on specific demographics such as number of pupils, district wide income levels, diversity of students, overall size, etc. The four other "similar" districts to Worthington are Dublin, Hilliard, Gahanna-Jefferson and Westerville. Any comparison of any part of Worthington 's expenses, performance, etc. to any district outside of the other four is like comparing dogs to horses.

According to the ODE website (the CUPP 2008 report) here are some statistics to put his statement more into perspective, comparing Worthington to "similar" districts only.

Classroom Teachers Average Salary (FY 2008-09)

(This excludes benefits)

WSD $67,375.59

Similar districts $61,394.33 (We are actually the second highest of the local five)

Median Income

(TY 2006-07)

WSD $42,613.00

Similar districts $45,073.00 (Worthington is actually second lowest by only a smidge) – and these are pre-recession incomes.

What Mr. Wilson fails to realize is that our teacher salary/benefit package is too costly considering Worthington's loss of businesses during the last six or so years and that the schools rely more and more on residential property taxes, while a greater percentage of local residents are retiring or living on fixed incomes. It is also too costly when you compare other similar districts' expenditures and revenues:

(Again from ODE's website)

Total expenditure per pupil (FY08-09)

WSD $12,300.97

Similar districts $10,692.26

Total revenue per pupil (FY 2008-09)

WSD $12,487.74

Similar districts $10,527.92

Total property tax per pupil (FY 2008-09)

WSD $8,759.89

Similar districts $7,410.71

We may wish there were unlimited resources to fund an ever-increasing population of school employees, but the real world dictates budget cuts. (From the ODE website)

Number of regular classroom teachers (FY 2008-09)

WSD 471.60

Similar districts 347.71

The schools can't keep spending money as they did in 2003. The current economic times, limited financial resources of the community should equal drastic reduction in spending. The "well" is dry! Closing Perry Middle School is a good start; reconfiguring the elementaries would be another good step. Drastically reducing the number of employees and salaries/benefits would be the most important thing the board could do.

Stephanie Haueisen

Here we go again. The school district talks about its legitimate and understandable funding difficulties and John Herrington adds his narrow anti-teacher bias to the debate.

This district, in fact schools all over the nation (both with unions and without, for Herrington's information), are in dire straits. And now, as the long and tedious debate commences about what to do, might I suggest that this is a three-pronged issue. It cannot be dealt with effectively when we talk about only one prong. In Herrington's view, it's all the fault of union contracts. The fact is that employee costs are only part of the problem, if any at all.

First off, we must determine the requirements, aspirations, and expectations of the community regarding our school's overall mission. I am not convinced that this has been done effectively, but that important difficulty aside, when financial constraints loom those desires of the community must be reviewed and adjusted.

Second, we must address what the cost of meeting those requirements will be and determine what level of support the community can handle. In other words, a price tag must be put on the agreed upon requirements, aspirations, and expectations. Put another way, you can't have that for which you won't or can't pay.

Third, the workload and benefits of employees and the costs of facilities must be addressed to fit within the district's fiscal capacity but still adequate to meet the community requirements. It is the juxtaposition of these two factors – costs and requirements – to each other rather than either one alone that is the critical.

Herrington's approach obviously falls well short of either "educating Worthington," as he proclaims, or seriously addressing the issue. Unless we address all three components of the issue simultaneously, and properly align each with the other two, none will be addressed appropriately.

Bob Barkely [former executive director of the Ohio Education Association]

What kind of people do we elect and appoint to the Worthington board of education, and the treasurer's post? Do they not know the meaning of a budget, or fiscal responsibility?

Gee, if you are taking in less income than the amount you are spending, what would you do first? That's right, you would scale back your spending, not go to the "cash cow" public. If we (the cash cows) start spending more than we make, we don't go to our boss and say, "I need more money." We spend less (or we go bankrupt).

And, what causes this ongoing mess in the Worthington school district? You will probably say the economy — well, of course, we all have to deal with that. But, it goes back much further in history. Start with the fancy board of education palace (that wasn't needed, then the health care packages, the overpaid top-heavy administrators and finally, the ridiculous teachers' contracts.

The board of education and administration deserve to be replaced for financial ineptitude.  I, for one, am tired of constantly seeing our property taxes raised. I know for a fact that high property taxes scare away many potential real estate buyers. The Worthington schools are excellent probably as much due to the quality of the students, as from the school system itself.

I call on the board of education and the treasurer to learn how to stretch dollars, and avoid any further increases in our property taxes. By the way, why don't we have a school income tax (a less regressive tax) rather than property taxes?

Phil Alspach

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

To the editor:

Have you noticed that despite two significant recessions over the last 10 years, the local teachers union has enjoyed average raises of over 5-percent per year? Have you heard that although we passed a levy just six months ago, Worthington Schools will likely need a sizable new levy next year, and every two years thereafter, while we continue to cut student programs in order to sustain rapidly rising salary and benefit costs?

This situation is not unique to Worthington, as similar raises and similar program cuts have been common among our local school districts. In other words, the unions have done their jobs — jobs which are not about educating children, but are about securing district dollars for generous salaries and benefits.

In light of the dire circumstances this has created in Worthington and many other districts, Educate Worthington has a question: "Does the union's success in negotiating salaries and benefits have anything to do with the increasing levy demands and significant program cuts we now face?"

The answer is yes, and the proof is undeniable once we acknowledge that 87-percent of all levy dollars are for compensation, driven by the union contracts, which are negotiated and approved by the school board.

This compensation includes raises at double the rate of most American workers, and these raises have increased our average teacher salaries to over $72,000 for the 9 1/2 month school year. Taxpayers then contribute approximately $10,000 for pensions that allow full retirement in just 30 years, guaranteeing a lifetime retirement benefit of $4,000-$5,000/month.

As for healthcare, taxpayers cover 88-percent of the teacher's insurance premium, and the first $2,000 of the teacher's annual deductible. The bottom line is that these union contracts have become pretty expensive.

On May 12, The New York Times ran a story titled, "Greece, Debt and a Lesson," and correctly summarized the cause of Greece's severe financial crisis by saying, "They have been enjoying more generous government benefits than they can afford."

Can Ohio's local school districts (and our federal government) learn any lessons from Greece? Or will we instead choose to dismantle school programs and services for our children and our districts, while we accept $450 tax increases every two years so we can ignore the obvious — the union contracts that drive school spending have become more generous than we can afford. (And we know that Greece funds its unsustainable spending with "debt," while we fund ours with "levies.")

So as not to end this conversation without a suggestion on addressing this critical issue that is so harmful to our students and our communities, consider this: What if Ohio school district leaders openly admitted that the expensive union contracts are the primary cause of this problem? What if they then organized to lead the charge in educating our communities and our lawmakers about the growing financial crisis in our schools, while honestly acknowledging this "cause"?

Can Ohioans handle this truth, or will we continue down the road to Greece?

John Herrington

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

Is the Worthington school district about to fall off a cliff, or were Marc Schare's words just unfortunate hyperbole that could hurt the reputation of an excellent school district?

Members of the Worthington Board of Education seemed split on that question at Monday's meeting, where they took up the heated discussion of finances and the future of the schools.

The discussion began at a board retreat on May 7 and continued at the May 10 regular meeting, when the board approved a grim five-year forecast that would require an operating levy be placed on the ballot next year, and possibly every year or two thereafter.

Schare's words that the district is "about to fall off a cliff unless something is done" and ThisWeek's story about a three-year levy lasting for only two drew a lot of mail from community members, he said.

Charlie Wilson, often at odds with Schare on the board, said the words were "very troubling and hurtful to our district."

The five-year forecast overestimates expenditures and underestimates revenues, he said, and Worthington is a choice district where residents are committed to maintaining quality.

"I am convinced this community will not allow the Worthington school district to fall off any cliff," Wilson said.

Board member David Bressman said he agreed the district would not be the first off the cliff, but he does not want it to be in a line of lemmings falling off a cliff either, he said.

Schare urged Wilson to "do the math."

"We are struggling to operate the district under a series of constraints," Schare said.

Those include a labor contract that allows no discussion of salaries and benefits; parents who object to cost-saving measures such as closing a middle school or reconfiguring elementary schools; a community that will not approve levies in excess of 7 mills; and a state government that issues a "steady stream of unfunded mandates."

Wilson said he objected to what he sees as a constant attack on teachers' salaries and salary scale.

He said that in 2003, Worthington's salary schedule was second from the highest of the 16 districts in central Ohio. By 2009, it had fallen to ninth, and is now eighth.

"I don't think we're overpaying our teachers," Wilson said.

Parent Michelle Dickson also got into the discussion, informing the board that she and other Wilson Hill parents object to the idea of reconfiguring elementary schools.

Under such a plan, each elementary school would either serve kindergarten through third grade, or fourth through sixth grade.

That would essentially be the end to neighborhood schools, and would mean busing students to schools across town, she said.

We do not want to find ourselves in the unenviable position of middle school parents who had no say in the closing of Perry Middle School, she told the board.

Many middle school parents object to sending the Perry students to McCord Middle School next year, but the board made that decision and has stood firm, despite their pleas.

Dickson said she was disappointed to have to learn about the reconfiguration discussion by reading it in ThisWeek Worthington. The issue is not mentioned on the district's Web site, nor were parents informed in any other official manner, she said.

"We parents feel deceived," she said, asking the board for more "proactive communication."

Bressman said that there has been no commitment made to pursuing reconfiguration. It was an idea that he brought up and, along with other potential money-saving measures, he believes it needs to be discussed before a levy is placed on the ballot next year.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Ohio school-district treasurers deserve sympathy as they attempt to put together budgets for 2010-11, not to mention forecasts for the next five years, with little information about how bad the state budget picture will grow.

The wise, such as Pickerington Local School District Treasurer Dan Griscom, are preparing for the worst. Griscom declared, "I'm being as pessimistic as I can be at this time."

He's projecting a $3.4 million drop in state funding for the 2011-12 and 2012-13 school years, what he calls "a body blow" to the district.

That sentiment won't cheer parents who want their schools to have budgets as robust as possible, but it's the responsible way to deal with the near certainty of sharp budget cuts come July 2011, when state lawmakers have to produce the next biennial state budget. That budget is likely to start out with a shortfall in the neighborhood of $8 billion, because that's how much of the current budget depended on one-time funding sources such as federal stimulus money and accounting gymnastics.

Smart school-district budgeters know that translates to cuts in education funding, but they can't know just how big the cuts will be. Some districts are considering asking voters for new taxes and need to know the state-funding picture in order to decide on a levy request. Meanwhile, those in charge of the state budget are offering little help.

The June 30, 2011, state budget deadline is more than a year away, and under normal circumstances, it would be less than urgent at this point. But current circumstances are dire, and past performance - the months-long fight that preceded the passing of the current budget - suggests the legislature should be starting very early on solving this problem.

But a panel of lawmakers formed in September to seek a budget solution has yet to meet. Nor has Gov. Ted Strickland offered any leadership on the issue. Election-year politics is trumping responsible governing. That's more irresponsible than usual this year, when a budget abyss of unprecedented size awaits.

One thing school districts can count on is not seeing the fulfillment of Strickland's "evidence-based" school-funding formula, which included a number of expensive initiatives, such as smaller elementary classes and all-day kindergarten, with no plan to pay for it. The formula was included in the current budget with the promise that it would be phased in over several years, with full funding achieved by 2018-19. But the money isn't in the current budget and is less likely in the next.

Realistic school administrators know better, and should proceed with the idea that, unless local taxpayers want to substantially raise their property taxes, school budgets are going to have to become leaner. Districts should face the fact that worthy programs will be cut and should be laying the groundwork for those tough decisions.

Worthington school board members still are trying to find ways to save money, but some parents don't like the ideas so far.

By PAMELA WILLIS Published: Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Worthington City School District voters may see another operating levy request as soon as next year, despite passing a tax issue last fall.

Treasurer Jeff McCuen said the district's new five-year forecast shows expenses exceeding revenue by more than $2.6 million by the end of June, which is the end of fiscal year 2010.

A carryover balance keeps the district from an actual budget deficit until 2014, but the deficit would be a big one that year, McCuen said: more than $15.6 million.

Numbers fluctuate, but what won't change is the bottom line, McCuen said, and the district is now spending more than it's taking in.

McCuen said Tuesday, May 25, that the numbers in the monthly financial report "look like we'll doing a little better than the forecast. We'll still be in deficit spending, but maybe not to that degree."

Voters approved a 6.9-mill incremental levy request in November 2009 after turning down a 7.4-mill tax issue in May 2009.

The bottom line means more cuts or more revenue, McCuen said.

He said a 6-mill levy request in November 2011 would provide $26.4 million -- enough to last through 2014.

Without those funds, a 10-mill levy would be needed in November 2012, with another request on its heels one year later, he said.

McCuen said he never promised the incremental tax issue would be enough to last three years.

Worthington school board members discussed some of the district's financial woes in a workshop held May 7 and the board meeting held May 10. McCuen presented the new financial forecast at that time, prompting board Vice President Marc Schare to say, "Something has to change or we are about to fall off a cliff."

Schare said a change in staff members' negotiated agreements should be considered, instead of cutting more school programs.

Board members responded to Schare's comment and discussed the financial situation again at the board meeting Monday, May 24.

"We are not anywhere close to a cliff," said board member Charlie Wilson.

"I am convinced this community will not allow this district to fall off a cliff -- it just can't happen," he said. "Other districts are much closer to falling off a cliff than we are. I'm firmly committed to keep this district as a district of choice and I think our community is also committed to this."

"I don't want to be in a line of lemmings watching other districts fall off a cliff and say, 'Well, we weren't the first to go,' " board member David Bressman responded.

Bressman said at the work session that changes in the school program should be discussed, such as reconfiguring elementary schools into K-3 and 4-6 buildings, instead of each one holding grades K-6. He also suggested creating a sixth-grade building in Perry Middle School.

Perry Middle School is scheduled to close this fall, leaving only the Phoenix program in the building as Perry students move to the McCord building.

Two parents spoke to board members during the May 24 meeting regarding Bressman's ideas.

Michelle Colter Dickson said "elementary school parents do not want our neighborhood schools changed or to have our children bused across town.

"We don't want to be in the position of the middle school parents, who have no voice in the closing of their school," she said.

Dickson said she is ready to be on a parent-administrator task force "immediately."

Bressman assured her "there is no task force to discuss reconfiguration."

"Nothing has been decided and there are no back-door deals," he said. "I brought reconfiguration up at the work session because I thought we should discuss these things. Nothing is a done deal, but I said what I did because we have to discuss ways to save money.

"I will not vote to approve putting a levy request on the ballot next year unless we have those discussions," Bressman said.

Schare said the district is struggling to operate "under constraints" that include a parent base that seems to indicate changes such as the middle school restructuring and any thought of reconfiguration to save money will be resisted.

"And the community has told us by their votes we cannot expect to pass levies in excess of 7 mills," he said.

He said the state legislature is throwing a steady stream of unfunded mandates at school districts.

"The administration has done what they can by looking for cuts without hurting the program; however, despite the cuts, we are where we are, with the promise of more cuts to come, more community angst and more over-the-top levy campaigns where we have to threaten to cut everything under the sun to win increasingly larger millages at increasingly shorter intervals," he said.

Schare said he hoped board members could use the first two months of summer to look at the state audit report, the Treasurer's Advisory Committee recommendations, "and get on with making the structural changes necessary to get to reasonable levies at reasonable intervals.

"I hope we don't try to start another levy campaign until we do that," he said.

Wednesday, May 19, 2010 By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

Closing Perry Middle School will save the school district approximately $865,000 next year and slightly more than $1-million in each successive year, according to Worthington Schools treasurer Jeff McCuen.

McCuen reported the figure at the May 10 school board meeting.

Parents at three earlier board meetings had requested the figure, and McCuen said he did not know. Then, at a May 7 board retreat, board member David Bressman said it was time the treasurer figured it out.

"To say we don't know comes across as evasive," David Bressman said. "I'm not going to accept 'I don't know' as an answer."

All of the students from the regular program at Perry will be assigned to McCord Middle School next year. Since that announcement in February, many Perry parents have repeatedly asked the board for information and complained about the decision.

"You have simply not convinced me that what you are doing makes dollars and cents," parent Amy Cameron said at the May 10 meeting.

The board decided last August that it would make changes at the middle school level that would save the district $1-million. That decision was part of the process of deciding the size of the levy that was to be placed on the November ballot.

The board had been eying the middle school program for years because the cost per pupil at the middle schools was not only higher than at Worthington's elementary and high schools, but higher than at middle schools in comparable districts.

The Perry building will not close next year, but will continue to house the Phoenix alternative middle school program.

Parents have also repeatedly asked the cost of the Phoenix program, but have not received an answer in public.

McCuen said the $865,000 and $1-million figure cover the savings from certified staff reductions. Eleven teaching positions will be eliminated.

The average Worthington teacher earns $72,000 a year, plus benefits equal to an additional 30 percent, for a total of $96,300. Multiplied by 11 full-time-equivalent positions, the total is $105,930.

The $865,000 that will be saved next year takes into account that 3.5 of those positions will not be covered by attrition. The people holding those positions will be reduced in force, or "riffed."

According to the terms of the teachers' contract, teachers who are riffed have two options.

They can choose to leave work and receive all health benefits and half of their salaries for one year, at which point they will no longer be employed by the district.

The second choice is to continue health coverage and work as pool substitutes. Pool substitutes earn $100 a day and must work 180 days.

There will also be classified positions eliminated when Perry closes, but McCuen said he did not know how much savings would result.

'We are about to fall off a cliff,' says Marc Schare of district's financial future

Tuesday, May 11, 2010 7:15 PM By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

Worthington school district voters approved a three-year incremental property tax levy last fall, but don't expect those three years to elapse before another levy is on the ballot.

Along with a bleak five-year financial forecast, Worthington schools treasurer Jeff McCuen presented on Monday night a recommendation that a levy -- and a bond issue -- be placed on next year's ballot.

Last year's 6.9-mill levy will only keep the district out of red ink through 2013, according to the forecast.

McCuen said that a levy of approximately 6 mills should go on the November 2011 ballot. The continuing levy would only keep the district afloat for two years, then another levy would be needed.

If the levy is postponed until 2012, it would have to be approximately 10 mills, and would only last for one year, he said.

At the same time, the district's capital improvements money is about to run out, and the district must return to voters for another bond issue or be forced to take money for buses, building repairs, and computers out of the general fund.

Both at the Monday night meeting of the Worthington Board of Education and during a board retreat on May 7, board members repeatedly asked the media to convey to the public the seriousness of the district's financial situation. Besides large, frequent levies, residents can also expect to see major changes in programs.

Board president Julie Keegan made the analogy of the district being like a family forced to save money. Until now, the family has saved by cutting back on a cup of coffee a day. Now it is time to move to a smaller house, she said.

Before moving from a 2,500-square-foot house to a 1,100 square foot one, the community should be given a choice, said superintendent Melissa Conrath.

Changing elementary school configuration from kindergarten through grade six to kindergarten through grade three and grade four through six is one of the changes that will probably be considered. That plan was studied two years ago and has been awaiting a revival by the board.

Board member David Bressman also suggested creating a sixth-grade building at the Perry Middle School site and moving the Phoenix program to Worthington Kilbourne High School and putting all kindergarten classes in one building.

However the district decides to reduce costs, the decisions must be made soon, he said. He suggested appointing a task force immediately.

"We've got to start doing something before the end of the school year," he said.

Beginning this year, the district is spending more money than it is collecting. Expenditures in 2010 are expected to be $115.2-million. Revenue is estimated at $112.6-million.

Without a levy or additional spending cuts, the trend accelerates through 2114, when spending is expected to be $133.3-million and revenue $111.4-million, creating a $15.6-million deficit by the end of that year.

Having a major impact on revenues is the state's phase-out of its reimbursement to the district for the money lost with the cancellation of the tangible tax. Worthington was particularly hard hit among suburbs because it collected considerable tangible taxes from the Busch Brewery.

In 2005, the district's tangible tax revenue was $17.7-million. In 2014, it will be $2.6-million.

The district will also take a hit from the stagnant housing market. Until three years ago, property values increased at each three-year valuation. McCuen said he expects to see no increase next year, just as there was none three years ago.

The budget figures could improve if the state or the federal government come through with more support than the treasurer included in the five-year forecast. He included a 10-percent decrease in state support for the next two years.

The forecast assumed no increase in the base salary of teachers in 2012. The Worthington Education Association agreed to no increase during the levy campaign last year.

A one-percent increase for 2013 and 2 percent the following year were assumed in the forecast. Also included are step increases, which usually average approximately 3 percent per year.

Board member Marc Schare asserted that extending the teachers' contract for an extra year was not a wise choice. Now a new agreement cannot be reached until the spring of 2012, instead of 2011. When the teachers agreed to a 0-percent increase, they also agreed to lengthen the contract by a year.

A change in the negotiated agreement is one way to slow increasing expenditures, he said.

And something has to be done besides continually cutting programs, he said.

"Something has to change or we are about to fall off a cliff," Schare said.

THE Toledo Public Schools wants district voters, amid a deep recession, to approve a new, permanent income tax on the May 4 ballot to help meet current expenses. Because the school system still has not shown in adequate detail how it plans to contain the cost of its most expensive budget item by far - employee compensation - The Blade recommends a NO vote on Issue 3.

The district says it faces a projected $30 million budget deficit in the next school year - roughly 10 percent of its general fund. The Board of Education approved spending cuts this month that would cover about $12.5 million of that gap. If voters approve the 0.75 percent tax on earned income the district seeks, school officials say no further cuts will be needed immediately.

The proposed tax would not apply to pension benefits, unemployment compensation, or investment income. Still, it would create a new $300 tax bill for a household that earns $40,000 a year.

District officials say the earned-income tax is preferable to yet another hike in school property taxes, especially for retired homeowners on fixed incomes. Opponents contend that despite its exemptions, the flat-rate income tax would be unstable and regressive, falling relatively harder on poorer and working-class households than on wealthier ones.

Advocates of Issue 3 warn that if the school tax plan fails, district students will endure larger classes, big cuts in bus service and crossing guards, reductions in middle-school and less-popular high-school sports, and fewer offerings at the successful Toledo Technology Academy. District officials note that they have not asked for new taxes since 2001, and that the recession has battered the school system's tax base and state aid.

Yet even as the district considers cutbacks in programs and services that directly affect students, it has shown little progress on trimming employee pay and benefits, which account for four-fifths of the district's operating budget.

Of the $30 million in actual and potential spending cuts identified by the district, just $3.3 million are in direct employee pay adjustments. Less than a month before the election, those cuts remain merely proposed.

The district is negotiating with its unions on a proposal that would require represented employees to take a 1 percent salary cut and pay more for their health coverage. Many other workers in Toledo - those who still have jobs - have had to give up much more.

And bargaining on even these minimal concessions has stalled while the district figures out how to pay for the school board's reversal of an administration proposal to close Libbey High School - a decision that will cost the district an additional $1.3 million immediately and much more down the road. Critics contend the district is wasting money keeping other underused schools open as well.

Similarly, pay givebacks agreed to by district executives seem more symbolic than real, at a time when their ballot proposal would inflict tangible pain on external constituents.

It's tough to oppose any funding plan that could spare Toledo's 26,000 public school students from further erosion in the quality of their education. But the district's effort to impose big new costs on taxpayers and new burdens on students and parents, while achieving far too little financial sacrifice from its own employees, including those at the top, is too unbalanced to justify.

If the school system can right that balance between now and Election Day, The Blade will revisit its position on the tax question - and so, we believe, will many other district taxpayers. Until then, though, Issue 3 merits a NO vote.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010 By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

The plan to close Perry Middle School next year is not proving popular with some parents.

Nine parents and one student addressed the Worthington Board of Education on Monday night, asking the board to rethink the decision to send approximately 150 Perry students to McCord Middle School beginning next year. They said the decision had been made hastily and without parent input.

The decision to reduce the amount of time spent on health education in the middle schools was also questioned.

School administrators announced the decision to close Perry in February, and held a public forum to explain the plan at Kilbourne Middle School on Feb. 18.

The plan is designed to save money. In deciding to place a reduced millage levy on the November ballot following the failure of a May levy, board members chose the middle schools as one place to cut expenses.

The cost-per-pupil is higher at Worthington's middle schools than at either the high or elementary schools. The cost is also higher than in comparable districts, according to Worthington administrators.

Currently, Worthington operates four middle schools. The alternative Phoenix program, with 160 students, is located at Perry. Approximately 150 students attend the regular program at Perry.

The Phoenix program will continue in the Perry building, with plans to expand the program numbers in 2011.

The rest of the students will be transferred to McCord, where enrollment is expected to swell to 530 next year, and to 590 by 2015. The school's capacity is 700.

The enrollment at Kilbourne and Worthingway middle schools is expected to remain steady, at 335 and 360, respectively.

The assignment changes, along with the elimination of team teaching, are projected to save the district $250,000 next year and $750,000 a year each following year, according to district treasurer Jeff McCuen.

At the February meeting, administrators said that 12.5 jobs would be cut. A parent on Monday said that number has been decreased to 10.

The exact number of teachers who will lose their jobs will not be known until May, after retirements are announced, said district spokesperson Vicki Gnezda.

Some parents on Monday said they would have preferred that all of the middle schools be involved in the reassignment, but others said the main concern was that a decision had been made without involving the parents.

The approximately 250 parents who attended the Feb. 18 meeting were not given an opportunity to speak. They were permitted only to write their questions for administrators to answer. Some said their questions were ignored, others said the promise of answers being posted on the district's Web site was not fulfilled.

Concerns about changes in curriculum and organization of the school day were also not well addressed, said parent Kate Whitesel.

"I don't know anyone who wants to hear phrases like 21st century learning again," she said.

The decision had already been made before the February meeting, parent Dawn Tabata said.

Overcrowded hallways, early lunch periods, class size, and the attention to the social growth of middle school students were among her concerns.

"How will it affect children?" she asked.

Worthington Kilbourne student Joshua Cook said he was concerned about health classes being reduced from one semester to nine weeks. The class is influential with middle school students as they begin to deal with issues like drinking, smoking, and drugs, he said.

Parent Lore Dorn-Cook suggested that the number of administrators be cut instead of health education.

The Phoenix program is a "pet project" and a "sacred cow" of the administration, she said.

"It is not a good use of taxpayers' money," she said. "You are showing preference and bias."

Superintendent of Schools Melissa Conrath assured the parents that the middle school's outstanding staff will make sure there is a safe, nurturing environment at McCord, and said four or five parents will be invited to be part of a committee planning the changes.

"We will work with you as we move forward," she said.

Board president Julie Keegan said she was "sad" that the issue created mistrust.

"The channels have not worked as well as we hoped they would," she said.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010 1:59 PM By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

The global warming debate is over, at least at Worthington Board of Education meetings.

After listening to a second round of debaters on Monday night, board president Julie Keegan said that if residents have concerns about what is being taught in Worthington classes, there are procedures to follow to register their concerns.

"In future meetings, we will not address global warming or how it is addressed in our curriculum," she said after six people -- not all of them district residents -- talked to the board about the divisive climate change issue.

Board member David Bressman waited until the end of the meeting to register his reaction.

"Frankly, I'm sick and tired of it coming before the board," he said.

At both the March 8 and March 22 board meetings, the questioning of a few was met by many more who said that global warming is not scientific debate, but a political and economic one.

The primary global warming questioner at both meetings was Robert Wagner, who listed his address as Honeywood Court, which is in southwest Columbus.

Anyone who thinks global warming is a given is mistaken, he said on Monday. The data on which that conclusion is based are flawed, he said.

Wagner said he would like to set up a debate with Lonnie Thompson, one of the foremost experts in climatology. Thompson lives in Clintonville and was one of the speakers at the March 8 meeting.

Thompson said he would debate, but only against peer-reviewed scientists, Wagner said.

"Peer review is a rigged system," Wagner said.

Richard Gunther, a parent in Worthington and a political science instructor at Ohio State University, said that politics should not be allowed to undermine the quality of education in Worthington.

There is no question that man's consumption of fossil fuels has caused dramatic changes in the world's atmosphere, he said.

There has also been a rapid polarization of political views in this country in recent years, and the global warming "debate" reflects that, he said.

He pointed to radio and television talk show hosts like Glenn Beck, who he said has tried to mobilize his followers to put pressure on school boards.

"Scientific inquiry must remain insulated from politics," he said.

Resident Abramo Ottolenghi compared the debate on global warming to that on evolution. One deferred scientific principles to God, the other to "the god of money," he said.

Worthington parent Andy Katona said he would take his concerns about how global warming is taught to the state board of education, which is rewriting state science curriculum and standards.

Sunday, February 21, 2010 1:15 AM

Anybody worried about how well household income will stack up against expenses in the next year or two should feel for Ohio's school districts, which must plan for the near future with no sure idea how much money they'll be given by the state. They know only that the picture is likely to get uglier.

School officials should be able to turn to state leaders for realistic advice about how much state aid to expect. But in a campaign year such as this one, no one wants to talk about no-win scenarios such as that presented by Ohio's budget, which was balanced for 2010-11 only by pouring in more than $7 billion in one-time money -- from federal stimulus packages and other sources that aren't guaranteed to be available a year from now, when it's time to write the next state budget.

To be sure, the economy and state budget will be at the forefront of this year's legislative and gubernatorial campaigns, but no one will want to tell voters the simple, unvarnished truth: that Ohio -- along with all its local governments and school districts -- might have to make severe budget cuts or raise taxes or some combination of both to balance budgets beyond 2011.

Most state-government candidates will prefer to talk instead about their plans to boost economic development so that tax revenues increase and people find jobs. While economic development is critical to building a better future, it won't happen soon enough to solve the budget problems that local governments face right now. Ohio has yet to adjust to the fact that its true bottom line is going to be lower for some time to come. Story continues below Advertisement

School officials, who are working on budgets for their fiscal year that begins July 1, don't have the luxury of avoiding the issue.

The convoluted school-funding formula Gov. Ted Strickland wrote into the current state budget only muddies the waters. While the formula calls for substantial school-spending increases through 2019, fiscal reality dictates that, short of an unprecedented economic miracle that boosts state revenues beyond all expectation, the state won't be able to maintain level funding.

Even for the 2010-11 school budget year, which falls in the second half of the current two-year state budget, state funding for many districts could well drop, as state tax revenues lag behind estimates and the previous year's collections.

Beyond 2011, when the bottom truly drops out of the state budget, the picture is likely to be much worse.

Strickland hopes for another round of federal stimulus funding to bail out Ohio and other states as it did in 2009, but that would only worsen the already-dangerous federal deficit and delay the inevitable job of balancing Ohio's spending against the money it can raise in taxes.

Difficult cutbacks are in the state's future and almost certainly in the amount of state aid school districts will receive. What is uncertain is when the state's leaders will acknowledge this and start talking numbers.

Communities served by those school districts need realistic expectations, so they can start figuring out what they will have to live without. The longer those decisions are put off, the harder they will be.

Current 'guaranteed' money means influx of state cash needed in next 2-year budget

Sunday, February 14, 2010 By Jim Siegel THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH 

If an infusion of new state money does not materialize in the next two-year budget, a number of school districts, including many of those surrounding Columbus, could be at the front of the line for funding cuts.

When it comes to state funding for schools, there is the money that the state formula says a district is supposed to get, and the money a district actually gets.

For districts such as Worthington, Westerville, Reynoldsburg, Gahanna-Jefferson, Hilliard, Dublin and Olentangy, that gap has widened considerably.

The dynamic was created by Gov. Ted Strickland's school-funding formula, which was included with the state budget passed last year. A lack of money forced leaders to only partly implement the plan, but many districts across Ohio actually would get less money under the partial plan.

To soften the blow, state officials did two things as an interim step:

• They capped the losses at 1 percent this year and 2 percent in 2011.

• They gave about 400 districts what's known as "guaranteed" or "transition" funding -- money the districts would not have gotten if the funding formula had been allowed to work as written.

But those stopgaps could spell trouble. Generally, more "guaranteed" money today makes it less likely that those districts will get funding increases tomorrow. But projecting an exact impact is almost impossible.

"It's just another significant challenge that is very difficult to measure," said Jeff McCuen, chief fiscal officer for Worthington Schools, which went from $2.9 million in "guaranteed" money in 2009 to $12.1 million in 2010.

All this will not be a concern if state leaders are able to pour significant new money into education for the fiscal-year 2012-13 budget. That might be possible if the federal government comes through with another big stimulus package. The next state budget takes effect in July 2011 but will be rolled out in about a year.

Strickland and Democratic legislative leaders say they are committed to a full phase-in of the new funding formula by 2019, even though it will require several billion dollars.

"There is no desire on my part to see anybody get cut, and we're going to move heaven and earth to make sure that doesn't happen," said Rep. Stephen Dyer, D-Green, a key player in crafting the new funding formula. "I really think there has been a move from both sides of the aisle to really place the utmost importance on education funding. That is a good place to be if you're a school district."

But state tax revenue for January was $108 million below estimates. Through seven months of this fiscal year, tax collections were $1 billion less than in the same period of the previous fiscal year. And the state faces an estimated $4 billion to $8 billion deficit in the next budget, largely because of the loss of one-time state and federal money, much of which went to schools.

McCuen has forecast a freeze in Worthington's funding, but as tax collections fall, so does his optimism. "Concerns are raised significantly as to the state's ability to maintain education funding at the current level. Certainly, school districts that are as deep into the guarantee as we are most likely will be the first to see significant reductions."

David Varda, executive director of the Ohio Association of School Business Officials, agrees. "Those districts have to be aware that in a tough economic time, they are probably going to be the districts" that will be cut, he said.

Much can change in the next biennium. Dyer noted that if certain parts of the formula are phased in, such as the state picking up a greater share of the local contribution to education, some districts might not need more guaranteed aid.

Varda said that if money is available to support phasing in the funding plan, worries should be lessened. But he acknowledged, "that's a big if."

"Is it realistic that we're going to get through this biennial budget without cuts?" he said. "Our school districts have been held pretty harmless compared to their colleagues in other states."

While suburban schools are getting more guaranteed money, the change in the state funding formula has had the opposite effect on Columbus City Schools. It got nearly $11 million in guaranteed money in 2009 but this year gets none. Cleveland dropped from $52 million to zero.

Cutting district's costs will take cooperation of unions, officials say

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:03 AM By Charlie Boss THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

South-Western schools should lower their health-insurance costs, trim the maintenance staff and eliminate some buses, according to a state audit released yesterday.

The performance audit, which the district requested during its August levy campaign, also called on officials to spend $700,000 to replace technology.

Though the district could save about $2.5 million by instituting the audit's recommendations, more than half of the savings would require agreements from the district's unions. The savings would account for about 1 percent of the district's $200 million budget.

But some of the recommendations, such as eliminating positions, would compound savings over time, said Treasurer Hugh Garside.

"We're looking for about $15 million of savings over the next four years," he said. "If the items compound themselves, it could help."

Unlike a traditional financial audit that examines the district's bookkeeping, yesterday's audit analyzed South-Western's operations, including finances, human resources, facilities, transportation, technology and food service.

"Performance audits are management-improvement tools and, hopefully, district officials will take the recommendations and implement the ones they think will be helpful to their district," said Chris Abbruzzese, spokesman for the state auditor's office.

But some of the suggestions would require bargaining with the district's certified and classified unions, including:

• Mandatory direct deposit for all employees.

• Modifying step increases or limiting future wages for classified employees, so that compensation is in line with that at similar local districts.

• Removing provisions in the employees' contracts that hinder administrators' ability to manage, such as requirements on class size, school-day schedules and kindergarten aides.

• Bringing monthly health-care premiums in line with State Employment Relations Board averages for the Columbus area, enrolling more employees in lower-cost health-insurance plans and increasing employee contributions for dental and vision insurance.

• Evaluating incentives that encourage employees to retire.

But some suggestions raise concerns.

A recommendation to create an internal auditor position to review the district's operations would increase expenses, Superintendent Bill Wise said.

And eliminating nine buses from the district's fleet, as suggested, would mean longer ride times for students. Slashing 15 positions in maintenance and operations would meet industry standards, but it wouldn't take into account the district's community needs, Wise said.

For example, the district covers custodial costs when community groups such as parks and recreation departments use the buildings, he said.

Auditors lauded the district's operations in eight areas, including how officials manage workers' compensation costs and provide instruction to specialized students such as gifted and special-needs children.

District officials will compose a response plan to the findings, including whether they will go forward with any of the recommendations.

Bob Ruth, a retired Dispatch reporter who lives in the school district and helped start a citizens' watchdog group called Excellence for South-Western Schools, supports the auditor's health-insurance recommendations. Ruth and his daughter, Cindy Legue, have criticized the district's health-care plan at board meetings.

"The board has been irresponsible in caving in to the union in the past, and I hope they can get some backbone this time for a change," Ruth said.

The district is holding a community meeting to discuss the audit at 7 p.m. Thursday at the South-Western Career Academy, 4750 Big Run South Rd. in Grove City.

   Comments

Published: Wednesday, February 10, 2010

To the Editor:

Enough of Mr. Graham's (Worthington News, Jan. 17) vendetta against Huntington Bank given his frustration over financial losses. Let's keep focus on the topic, which is reducing teacher pay to ease the financial burden on taxpayers.

To close the books on my Huntington Bank experience, the bank realized $536 million in income, including eight of nine quarters of significant profit, when I worked for it. So much for my "front row seat" as the "banking industry plunged faster than the gas needle on a Cadillac."

As for teacher salary reductions, as outlined in my last letter, recent economic data -- private sector worker productivity -- is the primary justification for my position.

As for questioning my data related to teacher pay, I stand by it 100 percent and challenge anyone to prove it wrong.

As it relates to my position related to teacher pay cuts lacking logic, let's try it for the third time.

Private sector employees have absorbed pay cuts. The same should have been asked of Worthington teachers. The quality of education would have not have suffered as there are many teachers working for exemplary school districts nearby making considerably less that would have taken vacated positions. Supporting data has been presented in previous letters.

Graham's defense of the school board's fiscal incompetence was amusing. While he may find comfort in the fact that other businesses were in worse financial shape, from my perspective, any budget deficit reflects poor management.

While it is nice to see that he has come to support my position of reducing teacher salaries, he has yet to provide a specific recommendation. In a previous letter, he was critical of those taking his current position. Have he changed his thinking?

Finally, I am all for police and firefighters taking pay reductions. We in the private sector have been forced to tighten our belts and there is no reason why the same should not be expected by all within the public sector.

Guy Molde

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:53 PM By EVAN BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer Results of a state performance audit include recommendations that should yield $2.4-million in annual savings for South-Western schools. Almost all the savings would require collective bargaining to be accomplished.

The results, released officially Feb. 9, indicate that the bulk of annual savings - $1.4-million worth - should come by placing more of the cost burden on employees for medical insurance. Another $588,000 could be saved annually by doing the same for dental insurance costs.

The audit was conducted by state auditor Mary Taylor's office at the request of the district, which paid $68,800. The district's annual budget is nearly $200-million.

The audit also recommends elimination of 15 full-time and one part-time nonteaching jobs, plus eliminating the use of seasonal groundskeepers, all saving the district a total of $761,000 annually.

The audit recommends district officials eliminate nine active buses, as well, saving the district $305,000 a year.

The audit also says the district should spend an additional $700,000 annually to fully fund a five-year replacement schedule for technology.

South-Western treasurer Hugh Garside said the district already spends $500,000 annually on technology replacement.

"We recognize there are some things we need to do better," Garside said.

Superintendent Bill Wise said the audit gives his administration ways to be as efficient as possible.

"We want to make sure we make the best use of taxpayer dollars as we continue to move forward," he said.

Wise and Garside recognize health care costs are an impediment to district efficiency.

"We've made changes, but we need to continue to work hard and continue to make changes," Wise said.

He said in order to shore up a $15-million budget hole in the next three years (attributed mainly to state education cuts) his administration will need to work "hand-in-hand" with union employees, a community advisory group and performance audit results.

He added health care costs are an issue for nearly all employers across the nation.

The audit points out 29 areas that could be improved, mostly in district operations.

It also praises the district in eight areas: specialized instruction, workers compensation premiums, enrollment projection, classroom inventory and building utilization, transportation plan, network infrastructure, software application integration and the technology inventory system.

The audit highlights 35 other areas in the district's operations that are "in line with benchmark and standard organizational practices."

"(Auditors) really do say we do an outstanding job in many areas," Wise said.

Wise said district officials will release a response to the audit recommendations. He was unsure exactly when that would happen.

District officials have invited the community to a town hall meeting to discuss the audit at 7 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 11, at the South-Western Career Academy, 4750 Big Run South Road.

According to the audit, district data was compared to different peer groups, including similar school districts in Ohio. It also compared data to standards outlined by the Ohio Department of Education, State Employment Relations Board and other national auditing benchmarks.

Wise said the audit "validated at least 43 occasions areas where we are implementing best practices."

He and Garside drew attention to the district's per pupil expenditure number as validation.

South-Western spent $9,336 per pupil in school year 2007-08, while its peers spent $10,108, a difference of $773 per pupil.

The average number for school districts in the state is $10,184 per pupil annually, a difference of $848 per pupil from South-Western.

District critics have said South-Western employs too many administrators. According to the audit, the district actually employs fewer administrators per 1,000 students than 10 other peer districts across Ohio. South-Western employs 4.9 administrators per 1,000 students, which is 0.2 less than its peer average, according to the audit.

Also, South-Western spent about 9 percent less per pupil than its peers on administration in school year 2007-08.

     Comments

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:10 PM By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

Changes in assignment patterns and in program structure are in store for Worthington's four middle schools.

Probably beginning next school year, all traditional students attending Perry Middle School will go to McCord Middle School, and team teaching will be replaced with a program that includes eight class periods each day at McCord, Worthingway, and Kilbourne middle schools.

Details of the changes have not been finalized, and parents are invited to hear about the plans and to give their input during a meeting set for 7 p.m. Feb. 18 at Kilbourne Middle School.

The changes are expected to result in a savings to the district, Superintendent Melissa Conrath said. Budget reductions became necessary when voters approved a 6.9-mill incremental operating levy in November.

When the school board decreased the size of the levy after a 7.4-mill levy failed last spring, it acknowledged that reductions would be necessary.

"We are trying to identify ways to increase efficiencies without hurting the quality of the program," Conrath said.

The cost of operating the middle school program is higher per pupil than the high schools or the elementary schools, district spokesperson Vicki Gnezda said. The middle schools' costs also are higher than those in other central Ohio districts, she said.

Currently, the district operates the four middle schools. The alternative Phoenix program and about 150 students in a traditional program share the Perry building.

Those students are to be moved to McCord, which could house all of the students, Gnezda said. The redistribution of students is expected to last about five years, when the currently sagging middle school enrollment is expected to rebound.

Meanwhile, officials plan to expand the Phoenix program.

Moving the Perry students to McCord is expected to save money because of the reduced repetition of services.

"We will use the three buildings we have now to accommodate our students," Conrath said. "We are not planning to close a building."

What will be closed is the team-teaching approach that has been used for more than two decades. Students are assigned to a team of teachers who work together and stay with the same students much of the school day.

The new program will resemble the old junior-high program, though administrators seem to shy away from using that terminology.

"We are looking at a blended model," Gnezda said. "We are looking at restructuring the school day."

Wednesday, January 27, 2010 11:46 AM By PAUL COMSTOCK ThisWeek Staff Writer

It will take more than freezing base salary and step increases to solve problems inherent in the pay systems of Ohio public education, said Van Keating, director of management services for the Ohio School Board Association.

Largely because of the economy, some citizens are calling for the South-Western school district to negotiate a freeze in base salary and step increases with its unions this year.

The Reynoldsburg school board on Jan. 19 approved a freeze in base and step salaries for its employees until July 31, 2011.

Such a freeze is a short-term step that doesn't address larger problems of how school union contracts are negotiated, Keating said. The original intent of school employee salary schedules "has been severely perverted over time and has become cost-prohibitive," he wrote in the OSBA School Management News in October.

In that article on school salary indexes and in an interview with The Record, Keating said two elements of teacher and school employee compensation -- base pay and step increases -- originally were designed to serve two different functions.

Base pay, he said, was designed solely to provide cost-of-living increases so teacher and school employee pay can keep pace with inflation, "to keep a dollar worth a dollar."

Step increases served a different purpose, particularly for teachers, he said. Awarded during certain years of a teacher's tenure, step increases increase pay based on a teacher's years of experience and any additional education he or she receives.

"The more experience (teachers have), the more they are worth to the district," Keating said.

"That was really your raise, because you are worth more," he said.

School worker unions have sought to change all that, Keating said. Unions "like to talk about the base salary increase. They have it in their minds that's where they have their raise. ... Clearly the thinking has gotten convoluted," he said.

In his article, he wrote, "Unions put unrelenting pressure on districts to increase based salaries based on a litany of reasons: ability to pay, comparable data, average teacher salaries, fairness, etc. Every argument was advanced except that of inflation, so teachers began to regularly receive base salary increases that exceeded it. Discussions about raises based on the (salary) index were dismissed as if the index was divinely decreed and to argue otherwise was heresy."

In their bid to increase base salaries, he wrote, unions sought changes in certification and licensure standards and increased tuition reimbursement. "Schools reimbursing employees for tuition while simultaneously advancing them on the salary schedule has significantly added to the overall cost of indexes statewide."

He also wrote, "It is important to consider that merely taking a break from the effects of a salary index does not mean it, or the problems,will go away the following year. Freezes are a short-term treatment, not a permanent one."

Several districts have salary schedules that were "no longer sustainable. ... Unfortunately, there is no quick or easy fix to realign salary schedules other than through the method that created the problems to begin with: collective bargaining," his article said.

His article contained other criticisms of widespread salary practices, including those that discourage teachers from retiring.

He told The Record that South-Western, Westerville and Hilliard school districts all will negotiate contracts in 2010. "All of them really are in some ways within a whisker of each other with their problems," he said.

The Reynoldsburg pay freeze is part of a one-year contract extension for its teachers and classified employees.

The Ohio Education Association, the umbrella organization for most local Ohio teachers' unions, did not return a message seeking comment for this article.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

Marc Schare might be a man of "great character" and "enormous integrity," but he is not qualified to be vice president of the Worthington Board of Education, according to board member Charlie Wilson.

Wilson made a 15-minute impassioned plea before the board on Jan. 11. He asked fellow board members to not elect Schare as vice president.

His plea fell on deaf ears: The remaining board members voted 4-1 to make Schare vice president. Julie Keegan was unanimously elected president for 2010.

Schare likely will become president next year, as the vice president from the previous year traditionally fills that position. That idea does not please Wilson, who heaped generous praise on Schare prior to criticizing him for allegedly not supporting board decisions, rejecting the offer of the Worthington Education Association to freeze the base salary next year and rejecting the most recent contract with the teachers' union, among other charges.

Wilson said that in 2006, Schare voted against a proposed levy and wrote a letter to the editor, stating why residents should vote against the levy. Such action, Wilson said, violated Schare's responsibility as a board member.

Last November, Schare voted to place the levy on the ballot, but on his Web page said his personal vote on the issue depended on the message of the campaign committee.

Wilson called that "a huge disservice to the people of Worthington."

Wilson said he also objected to Schare's recent letter to the editor, in which he wrote that some teachers are paid too much, others are paid just right, and some are paid too little.

"I'm concerned about the impact of that letter on teachers," Wilson said.

He also accused Schare of violating a board member's code of ethics by urging Sen. David Goodman (R-New Albany) to vote against a bill that Wilson said would have benefitted the district and other districts across the state.

"I'm not convinced Marc's greatest concern is the welfare of all public schoolchildren," Wilson said.

Outgoing board president David Bressman said he was disappointed with Wilson's comments, especially because Schare's family and friends were present to see him take office.

Bressman said he sometimes disagrees with Schare, but that does not mean he is not qualified to be board president.

"The comments you made tonight serve to divide this board," Bressman said. "I wish you had thought this out a little bit more."

Asked if he wanted to answer Wilson's accusations, Schare told ThisWeek that he chose not to at this time. Instead, he said, he is studying some of the factual information presented by Wilson and will rebut his comments during the next board meeting.

Schare made a brief prepared statement at the end of last week's meeting. He said it has been a privilege and honor to work with the board.

There is broad agreement in the district, he said, adding that on the few issues about which the board disagrees, debate has always been respectful and productive.

"I am so grateful for the continued opportunity to serve this community, and while 2010 may indeed be a time of renewal for our school district, the decade-long tradition of absolute excellence is something that will never change," Schare said.

Published: Wednesday, January 20, 2010

To the Editor:

Guy Molde's response (Worthington News, Jan. 6) to my last letter made me even more appreciative of the wisdom of Somerset Maugham: "I can imagine no more comfortable frame of mind for the conduct of life than a humorous resignation."

Molde either did not understand or conveniently forgot that I actually agreed with his proposal for pay and benefits cuts for Worthington teachers. Granted, I think Molde's percentages are excessive, and his letter reinforced my thinking because it was an emotional outburst that lacked logic.

I didn't state that Molde still worked at Huntington Bank. I wrote that his thinking about public employees' pay and benefits cuts was shaped by his experiences as a middle manager at the bank. I wasn't sure where he is currently working, but apparently he was with Huntington from 2006-2008 and it was during that time that the banking industry plunged faster than the gas needle on a Cadillac, and Molde had a front row seat. That had to have shaped the words and tone of his letter.

As to qualifications for public flogging because of mis-management, Molde suggests that the Worthington Board of Education members rank ahead of the directors and managers of his former employer. A statistical analysis is in order.

A $14 million short gap in the annual Worthington school district budget would have been 12 percent of the current year's $114.8 million operating expense. Between the last quarter of 2007 and the last quarter of 2009, Huntington stock value declined 82 percent and its dividends by 96.7 percent. Twelve percent versus 82 percent and 96.7 percent is fifth-grade arithmetic and Huntington loses hands down.

That isn't to make light of Huntington's situation. After all, I own a number of its shares and I'd have been perfectly happy to have to only dealt with a $14 million problem with the local school district.

The most important point, however, is that all public employee unions should make pay and benefits concession, not only for the public good but for that of the unions as well. I expect police and firefighters to be included in those concessions. Does Molde agree?

Dick Graham

Sunday, January 17, 2010 By Dana Wilson The Columbus Dispatch

Unionized teachers and classified employees in the Reynoldsburg school district have agreed to forgo raises during the 2010-11 school year.

The school board will hold a special meeting Tuesday to vote on the pay freezes negotiated with the Reynoldsburg Support Service Association and Reynoldsburg Education Association.

The district faces a $4 million deficit next year after voters turned down a 9.9-mill operating levy request in November.

The unions' offers, combined with administrative salary freezes already planned for 2010-11, would save the district more than $1 million, said Tricia Moore, district spokeswoman.

The Reynoldsburg Education Association, which represents the district's teachers, approved a one-year contract extension that forgoes "step increases" and cost-of-living raises.

The Reynoldsburg Support Service Association, which includes secretaries, bus drivers, custodians, maintenance workers, cooks and others, recently approved a two-year contract that freezes salaries through July 31, 2011.

The concessions are "extraordinary examples of shared sacrifice aimed at cutting the budget while trying to protect educational quality," Superintendent Steve Dackin said in a news release.

Board disagrees, votes Schare as veep

By PAMELA WILLIS Published: Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Consensus became contention at the Worthington school board's organizational meeting this week as one board member stated publicly why another board member did not deserve a vice president position.

Board member Julie Keegan's election as the new president of the board was unanimous at the board meeting Monday, Jan. 11, at the Worthington Education Center.

Keegan held the vice president position last year, and the Worthington school board typically has slid the vice president into the presidential spot each year.

Electing this year's vice president was a different story.

Board member Charlie Wilson objected to the nomination of fellow board member Marc Share and stated why he would vote "no" for Schare's election to the vice president position.

Wilson read an Ohio School Board Association definition of a "good school board member" that stated a board member has a responsibility "to support a decision when it is made."

"I am not convinced Marc embraces the concept that it is his legal obligation to support the board once they have decided on an issue," Wilson said.

Wilson said Schare had voted against putting the 2006 operating levy on the ballot -- which Wilson said was Schare's right -- but that "10 days after the vote to put that levy on the ballot, in my opinion, Marc openly violated his responsibility to support the decision by arguing against the public passage of the levy.

"For the 2009 levy, his behavior was even more disappointing, in my opinion," Wilson said. "He said on his Web site his vote for or against the levy 'was up for grabs' and announced he would support the levy only if he agreed with the campaign language and the way the campaign was conducted. So he was announcing he would support the levy only if his demands were met."

Wilson said if Schare were elected vice president of the board, he would likely end up in the leadership position of president because of the board's past election practices.

"In my opinion, moving Marc into a leadership position would be a disservice to the district," Wilson said.

Wilson also said Schare had published a letter to the editor about Worthington teachers "being paid too much, too little and some just the right amount.

"I am concerned that he claimed some of the teachers may not be earning their salaries," Wilson said.

Wilson went on to say, "I believe Marc is an outstanding human being and I have enormous respect for Marc as a person.

"I also want to say this is not a divided board; we've always been able to disagree without being disagreeable," Wilson said.

David Bressman, last year's board president, said he was "very disappointed" about Wilson's comments.

"I find your comments disheartening," Bressman said. "You say this board isn't divided, but comments like that can serve to divide it.

"Lord knows Marc and I have had hard conversations over the last eight years, but I am very disappointed that what should have been a happy occasion, with many of Marc's family here to see him elected vice president, has turned into this kind of scene," he said.

Board member Jennifer Best agreed with Bressman.

"Marc has attended many more school functions than most of us and I believe he is always acting in the best interest of the students and the public," she said.

Schare didn't comment on Wilson's words before Keegan asked for a vote. Wilson was the only board member to cast a "no" vote for Schare.

Schare made one comment at the end of the meeting.

"January is a time for renewal, and it has been my privilege and honor to work with each of you," Schare said. "Our discussion and debate has always been respectful and you can't ask for more than that."

The next regular board meeting is set for 7:30 p.m. Jan. 25 at Worthington Education Center, 200 E. Wilson Bridge Road.

By GARTH BISHOP, COMMENTARY EDITOR

Published: Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Scanning through our series of "Year in Preview" stories last week, I happened to spot a few detailing school districts' plans to put levies on the ballot in 2010.

I can already hear the protests.

Campaigns opposing school levies have always pretty much sounded the same, and the state of the economy has only made the trend more prominent.

"The people can't afford it" and "The schools don't deserve it" are the two most significant rallying cries. Now the former applies to a much larger chunk of the population, while the latter's comparisons between the public and private sectors are all the more noticeable given the sacrifices made in the private sector.

Those arguments are true for some, but they're overgeneralized. No school district is without a single resident who can afford the levy, and no district budget is entirely devoid of worthwhile expenditures.

Pro-levy campaigns should be subject to the same scrutiny of overgeneralization. They love to trot out the "Your kids' education will suffer if you don't pass the levy" mantra and the "Hey, the state gave us a good rating -- that proves we deserve the money" line.

But they know those things by themselves don't really work anymore. They must go beyond empty campaign platitudes and point to hard facts: cuts made, concessions granted, promises kept.

I'm sure people will question the truth of some things proponents of last fall's successful levies said. But there's no denying the campaigns went beyond what was expected.

Organized levy opposition tends to go beyond the campaign platitudes and dredge up district documents to reinforce points. But thanks in part to pro-levy campaigns' much greater resources, it seemed only a handful of people went really deep into statistics to support anti-levy arguments.

A lot of post-election letters lamenting levy passages placed all the blame for that passage on school promises they don't expect to see kept. But none took any responsibility for their own role in failing to defeat it.

"No" voters truly dedicated to defeating a levy can't just rely on the local opposition campaign. These campaigns might not be able to send out the same types of campaign fliers or garner the support of prominent local officials, but they can point to the arguments against the levy -- preferably ones that aren't antagonistic, as antagonistic arguments tend to alienate voters -- or even get their hands on some district figures and make their own arguments.

Pro-levy campaigns have figured out that they can't get a levy passed on guilt alone. They have to find the best facts to support their point and get them passed along to as many voters as possible.

Anti-levy campaigns know they can't rely entirely on guilt, either -- but getting their data passed on to voters is tougher. That's where individual voters have to get involved, calculating and then disseminating their own information.

You can be one of those people. Maybe you'll find in the district's data something far more likely to garner "no" votes. Or maybe you'll realize the district really is trying its best.

But either way, you'll be much more convincing.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010 By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

Newly appointed school board president Julie Keegan, right, congratulates newly elected vice-president Marc Schare after swearing him in at the board meeting on Jan. 11. By Chris Parker/ThisWeek Newly appointed school board president Julie Keegan, right, congratulates newly elected vice-president Marc Schare after swearing him in at the board meeting on Jan. 11. Julie Keegan and Marc Schare were elected president and vice president of the Worthington Board of Education on Monday.

Keegan's election was expected, as she served as vice president in 2009. The vice president historically steps into the president's position.

Schare's election was less predictable, since he was passed over for the position last year. At that time, some members accused him of "having his own agenda" and not being a "consensus builder." Keegan was unanimously elected on Monday.

The vote on Schare was 4-1, with board member Charlie Wilson voting "no."

Schare is beginning his second term on the board. He and David Bressman and Jennifer Best were re-elected in November. They were sworn in on Monday.

The board also made annual appointments to boards, commissions, and organizations for 2010.

Appointed to the Ohio School Boards Association (OSBA) as legislative liaison was Wilson; delegate and alternate delegate to the annual assembly meeting of the OSBA, Keegan and Schare; student achievement committee, Best and Wilson; board representative to Metropolitan Educational Council, Keegan; share solutions committee, Wilson and Schare; liaison to city of Worthington, Keegan; OSBA- SALT, Wilson; finance committee, Keegan and Schare; liaison to Worthington Education Association, Wilson; liaison to Worthington Libraries Board, Best; communications committee, Bressman and Schare.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010 By CANDY BROOKS ThisWeek Staff Writer

Residents are overwhelmingly pleased with the quality of life in Worthington.

They especially like their strong neighborhoods, the accessibility of the city to central Ohio attractions, and the high-quality schools.

Concerns include stormwater drainage, street repair, economic development and crime prevention.

And if residents were forced to cut city services, the top choice would be parks and recreation facilities.

Those are some of the results of a recent telephone survey of 200 city residents done by a company called Communica, which was hired by the city, Worthington City Schools and Worthington Libraries to help with a collaborative strategic planning process.

The company called 600 randomly chosen registered voters. Two hundred were asked questions about the schools, and 200 about the libraries.

On Monday night, Bill Grindle of Communica presented the results of the city's portion of the survey.

The results of all three will be presented again on Jan. 22 and 23 at a community planning session called a visioning conference. Fifty to 60 community members have been invited to take part to help put together a plan for the future of all three entities.

The outcome for the city will be a plan to help guide future decisions. The schools and the libraries will write their own plans.

Worthington city manager Matt Greeson said he will present a draft for council review before the final plan is written.

"I am optimistic we will have a written plan this calendar year," Greeson said.

Grindle told council on Monday that, according to survey results, the favorite things about living in Worthington are neighborhoods and friendly people; central location; and the high quality of the schools.

Fourteen other qualities were also mentioned.

Asked what makes the city unique in comparison to other central Ohio communities, respondents said neighborhoods/friendly community/small town feel; excellent schools; and antiquity/history/older community/architecture.

The top three answers to the biggest challenge facing the city were school system funding/quality; financial crisis/poor economy; and the high cost of property taxes.

Asked to rate the performance of city government, survey respondents gave high grades. Ninety percent agreed or strongly agreed the city provides programs and service the community needs; 85 percent said the city is well managed; 80 percent said the city is headed in the right direction; and 65 percent said the city uses its money wisely.

"Overall, residents are pleased from a governance standpoint," Grindle said.

The survey compared what residents said was important to the performance of the city in the same area.

In most areas, performance was aligned with expectations.

Some of the exceptions were crime prevention, street repairs, and stormwater drainage. In each case, performance did not keep pace with expectations.

Economic and business development also proved to be an area of concern to residents. Sixty percent rated it as important, but only 38 percent rated performance as high.

A question that may be asked more frequently in the coming months was what items residents would consider reducing or eliminating if necessary because of funding issues.

The top answer - 59 percent - was "don't know."

The next most frequent answers were parks and recreation facilities, 29 percent; arts programs, 22 percent; holiday decorations, banners, programs, 20 percent; and lead/yard waste collection, 18 percent.

Local newspapers was the preferred method of communication, with 37 percent answering that it was how they get most of their local information. Other answers were e-mail, 28 percent, and mail, 25 percent.

The respondents were mostly female (65 percent); over age 65 (34 percent); household income between $100,000 and $150,000 (24 percent); had a four-year college degree (40 percent); and were married (70 percent).

Wednesday, January 6, 2010 By cbrooks@thisweeknews.com ThisWeek Staff Writer

The company that provides health insurance to employees of the Worthington Schools was the biggest contributor to the November levy campaign.

United Health Care Services contributed $10,000 to Worthington Community for Schools to use to persuade voters to approve the 6.9-mill incremental operating levy.

The levy was approved by a 60-40 margin on Nov. 4.

The campaign committee collected approximately $89,000 and spent approximately $60,000. Most of the money came from hundreds of individual contributors in amounts of $100 or less.

United Health Care was by far the biggest contributor.

Others who gave more than $1,000 to the cause include the Worthington Education Association (the teachers' union), $5,000; Huntington National Bank, $2,500; Joseph James & Associates, $1,500; Limbach Co., $1,500.

Those who contributed $1,000 include Worthington Kilbourne PTO, Thomas Worthington PTSO, CARDS Inc., Wolves Athletic Association, Central Ohio Realtors PAC, Microimage Inc., and Bricker and Eckler LLP State PAC.

Bricker and Eckler is law firm that represents the district.

The campaign committee spent approximately $60,000, according to finance reports filed with the Franklin County Board of Elections on Oct. 22 and Dec. 10.

Besides covering the expected yard signs and local advertising, the contributions funded the services of a Cleveland public relations firm and a Texas-based elections consultant.

Burges & Burges of Cleveland was paid approximately $24,000 for consulting, data lists, and reminder calls.

The Tyson Organization of Fort Worth, Texas, was paid $3,146. Its Web site states that it conducts "telephone voter turnout and grassroots advocacy programs for Democratic and non-partisan clients."

A company called Strategies Unlimited, 988 Circle on the Green, Columbus, was paid $4,500 for a survey.

The campaign committee inherited $15,000 left over from past campaigns.

A balance of $44,265 will be available to future levy campaigns. School officials have said that another operating levy could be on the ballot as early as 2011.

Published: Wednesday, January 6, 2010

To the Editor:

If Mr. Graham's (Worthington News, Dec. 23) letters are to have credibility, he needs to get his facts straight.

He cites my employment with Huntington Bank as the reason for my recommending that Worthington teachers absorb a pay cut much like that experienced by the private sector. Such an observation is ridiculous, as I have not worked at Huntington Bank for nearly two years.

Mr. Graham also infers that private sector pay cuts have been driven by a reduced demand for goods. This is also without merit.

Over the last two quarters, private sector worker productivity, driven by higher output and reduced pay, has increased at levels not seen since 2003. This indicates that demand remains, with private sector employees of all types being required to produce more while earning less as businesses struggle with other financial factors.

Related to the district's fiscal state, Mr. Graham suggested a "public flogging" of the board if our school system had been as badly managed as Huntington Bank. Perhaps he ought to get his whip ready given the following.

The district faced a budget shortfall of $14 million and the potential of having key education programs eliminated just a month ago.

While Worthington teachers are paid the 12th highest average salary in Ohio to achieve an exemplary Performance Assessment, eight school districts within 25 miles -- employing over 1,800 teachers -- pay their teachers at least 20 percent less while achieving a high rating.

While teachers at surrounding school districts have had their pay frozen, Worthington teachers continue to average a 5 percent annual pay raise when all designated increases are applied.

Despite arguments to the contrary, the facts remain. The financial distress experienced by the district was in line with that of the private sector that found pay cuts necessary and the quality of education provided students would not have been compromised by pay reductions given the close proximity of financially motivated, highly effective teachers.

With the next contract renegotiation, consideration ought to be given to decreasing teacher salaries. While contrary to the standard "throw more taxpayer dollars at it" solution, reducing expenses by over $5 million annually -- under a 10 percent pay reduction scenario -- makes the effort worth it.

Guy Molde

Published: Wednesday, January 6, 2010

To the Editor:

Dr. Ottolenghi (Worthington News, Dec. 16) opined that a pay freeze would result in teacher losses -- I assume he means "losses at an unacceptable rate." I must respectfully disagree.

Does anyone really believe that there would be some sort of mass exodus if pay were not increased 5 or 6 percent over a two- or three-year period? Sure, a few teachers might look elsewhere, but that's a positively rosy scenario when compared to failed levies and the resultant educational cuts.

State funding for our district is in decline; taxpayers at the local level must pickup the slack. Voters can understand this and might be willing authorize the next levy if this is the primary issue. If teacher pay raises can't be checked, the primary issue next levy time will once again be teacher pay.

Our teachers and administration are doing a great job -- can the board show some mettle and do the same?

John Toth

Worthington leaders will have their hands full in the new year as funds dwindle and enrollment increases at the elementary schools.

By PAMELA WILLIS Published: Tuesday, January 5, 2010

The Worthington City School District is struggling like most school districts in a tough economy, but 2010 also will bring enrollment challenges as leaders continue to move ahead with a school renewal process.

Superintendent Melissa Conrath said she would have to look back before envisioning the year ahead, because one of the reasons 2010 can be a successful year is the passage of Issue 49, the 3.9-mill incremental levy.

"The passage of Issue 49 was a significant accomplishment for the district, along with achieving an 'Excellent with Distinction' rating on the state report card," she said. "Passing the tax issue was vital to our ability to provide the revenue to support our program."

Passing the tax issue doesn't mean the district's financial problems are over, however.

"Because we went for a reduced millage amount and a phasing in of levy dollars, we will generate less dollars than the issue we had on the ballot in May," she said. "With the uncertainty of the state budget, we know we'll lose 1 percent of state funding this year and 2 percent next year.

"We're hoping that is the extent of it; however, currently there is an uncertainty as to whether the state will be able to provide even that level of funding," she said. "We will also see a dropoff of revenue because of the phasing out of the tangible property tax. We're being reimbursed for that right now, but the law doesn't extend beyond fiscal year 2012, so that could be a very significant decline in revenue."

Conrath said the district once again will have to revisit expenditures and make reductions.

"We need to make reductions because we want to be able to work with our community from the funding and revenue side to be able to request reasonable levies at reasonable intervals," she said. "The financial challenges and how we respond to them is important so that we do not diminish the quality of our Worthington school district."

Fluctuations in student enrollment also will be a challenge in 2010.

"We have experienced some decline in enrollment over the years, which is now at the middle school and high school, yet are beginning to see an increase in enrollment at the elementary level," she said. "The challenge that creates is, how do we most effectively house our students?"

Conrath said the increase in enrollment at the elementary school level means more buildings at capacity.

"We are running out of room and will not be able to accommodate the projected enrollment in our elementary buildings, some of which are at capacity," she said. "Yet we have excess capacity at the middle grade levels and with our current attendance patterns will have excess capacity at Worthington Kilbourne High School for several years.

"So we're dealing with how to best utilize our buildings and our capacity to house our students," she said.

Several years ago, a decline in enrollment at the elementary school level led to the merging of Liberty and Sutter Park elementary school students into the Liberty building.

The district currently houses preschool classes and some special-education classes at Sutter Park.

Conrath said school leaders will be seriously looking at and planning for a restructuring of the middle school program this month and next month.

Another major challenge will be making sure students are prepared academically for an increasingly global society.

"Our core purpose is to prepare students for their post-secondary plans," she said. "We need to make any changes that will best prepare students in the core academic areas to enter a world that is different than the world we have had in the past. Technology will play a major role in that."

Conrath said all Worthington school buildings have been working on school renewal plans to best prepare students for 21st-century learning.

Some of those plans, such as the International Business Academy at Worthington Kilbourne and the Entrepreneurship Academy at Thomas Worthington, already are in operation.

"We have been using the renewal process to reflect upon and become familiar with what the skill areas will be for those students and have to determine how we can redesign ourselves or position ourselves in a way that will provide students with the opportunities to develop the skills they need," she said.

Monday, January 4, 2010

For members of the Ohio School Funding Advisory Council, this is an inauspicious time to begin their task of recommending how much the state should spend on schools. Without a penny to spare in the current biennial budget and a mind-boggling deficit of billions of dollars looming in the next one, the group will find no gravy to spread around. In fact, cuts are more likely.

But the 28-member panel, which meets for the first time on Thursday, can do the state a great service if members recognize that fact and focus their efforts on devising the best possible school-spending plan with the limited resources available.

That would be a change from what some have seen as the council's mandate: to decide what schools ideally should have and tell the legislature how much to allocate, regardless of how much money is available or how much any other state program needs -- all based on a faulty assumption that school spending forever will increase.

That idea that education, among all the critical services delivered by state government, should be exempt from the give and take of competing funding needs never was reasonable. Now, given the state's straitened circumstances, it's impossible.

Unfortunately, the budget law that created the panel doesn't encourage practicality. It enshrines Gov. Ted Strickland's preoccupation with the inputs of education, the idea that schools will be successful if they just have a specified number of teachers, counselors, classrooms and the like. Besides being a transparent gift to teachers unions, the checklist approach has little provision for fostering innovation and encouraging those programs that work better than others.

The panel also, by law, is stacked with people bound to have a vested interest in the education status quo, not to mention a financial interest in bigger education budgets. Of the 28 seats, 13 are reserved for people directly involved in preschool-through-12{+t}{+h}-grade education. Only one person represents the public, and one seat each is saved for the business community, philanthropic organizations and the Ohio Academy of Science. Two are from higher education and four represent charter schools. The remaining seats go to the governor or his designee and four people named by leaders in the Ohio House and Senate.

Without doubt, the panelists will hear from the usual chorus of school-spending boosters. To do its job right, the council also should hear from the state budget director and tax commissioner and others who can keep the process grounded in fiscal reality: How much will the state have to spend on education in the 2012-13 biennium?

The answer, barring an economic miracle or a federal bail- out that would sink the nation further into debt, is likely to be less than the education establishment deems adequate.

That leaves the council with a job far more important and harder than lobbying for a bigger share of the state treasury. It means paring down a large wish list to those items that will do the most to improve the academic performance of Ohio's children.