TPT will hold a press conference today, Monday April 5th, 11 AM at the Early Voting Center at 1302 Washington Ave.  Press Release is after the fold….

Toledoans for Public Trust to Launch TPS Levy Campaign

WHO: Toledoans for Public Trust

WHAT: Press Conference

WHEN: Monday, April 5, 2010, 11 a.m.

WHERE: Early Voting Center, 13^th & Washington

WHY:         “Wrong Tax, Wrong Time” Campaign Kickoff

Toledoans for Public Trust (TPT) will launch an aggressive, grass roots, fact-based campaign to oppose the Toledo Public Schools 0.75 percent income tax levy outside the Lucas County Early Voting Center on Monday, April 5 at 11 a.m, 1302 Washington St..

Passage of the TPS levy would drive Toledo’s income tax rate to three percent. Combined with Toledo City Council’s recent decision to increase the monthly trash fee to $15 and lowering the tax credit for city residents who work in the suburbs, the TPS levy would place an undue burden on working Toledo families who already are struggling to survive.

“This income tax levy is simply the wrong tax at the wrong time,” said Steven Flagg, one of the founders of Toledoans for Public Trust, a new, local political action committee.

“The TPS board of education and district administrators have a long history of managing from crisis to crisis, without taking a hard look at long-term costs savings, restructuring the district in ways that make sense, and doing what’s best for the community. Now they are asking Toledoans to take more out of their pockets to continue to fund inept and ineffective TPS operations rather than taking the necessary steps to enact systemic reforms,” Flagg added

This positive campaign will highlight ways TPS can find costs savings, both short and long term, necessary to avoid budget cuts to successful programs. More information can be found at the group’s website: www.wrongtaxwrongtime.com.

Apparently the Board of Education and current administration are unaware of the actual history or someone is providing inaccurate information to the media that Libbey was not part of the master plan as the April 3rd Blade i in Vote to save Libbey puts TPS budget back in flux indicates that Libbey was not in the master plan as approved in November 2002 by voters.

From Vote to save Libbey puts TPS budget back in flux:

It was removed from the long-range master plan about 10 years ago to rebuild and renovate Toledo schools using state funds and local bond money. Those renovation projects, including building a new Start High, received 77 percent state matching money.

School officials kept Libbey off the master plan because student enrollment was down across the district and they predicted accurately that it would keep falling. A rebuild or major renovation now would take 100 percent local funds, and the mood is not in support of passing new bonds for school construction, Mr. Vasquez said. The school system, with far fewer students than it had 10 years ago, doesn’t need space.

The disagreement at the time was not about Libbey’s existence as a school community, but whether the school would be renovated or rebuilt new. TPS at the time wanted a new building for Libbey. But TPS did promise to review that decision to gain support for the levy.

The Libbey design the district came up with was unsatisfactory according to many in the community including a group called SOS, Save our Schools, and also the Blade. The Blade editorialized their concerns on September 5, 2003 in an editorial titled Preservation, not elimination.

In June 2004, TPS revised their master schedule and moved Libbey from segment 3 to the last segment, segment 6.  At that time it had become clear to some that enrollment projections would not support building schools in segment 6.

In June 2006, TPS again revised their master schedule and Libbey along with 15 other schools were eliminated from the building plan.  The issue of the preservation of Scott High School was also of concern as Scott was also moved into segment 6.  Scott was spared the wrecking ball because of community efforts and the passage of a bond issue in November 2008.

It is interesting that TPS Board Members are now saying it was a mistake to renovate Scott as two new smaller buildings could have been built. In that scenario both Libbey and Scott would have seen the wrecking ball. The position for two new schools was held by the administration and a majority of Board Members at the time of the levy vote, yet they ended up agreeing to the renovation.

It seems inappropriate for Board Members and TPS administration to now blame those that stepped up to save Scott, but that is what seems to be happening. The Board by a vote of 5-0 supported the decision which included Vasquez, Sobecki and Ford – all current board members.

Is it a case of revisionist history or a lack of homework or ignorance on the part of the current Board to now claim that Libbey was not part of the original master plan? In a strict technical sense old Libbey was not part of the original building plan, but money for a new building and demolition of the old was included.

Here is a link to the Wednesday meeting – http://www.knowledgestream.org/kstream/index.asp?item_id=5848.

Lawrence’s remarks begin at 9 minutes and 45 seconds. At 13:05 into the video Lawrence says twice “There is fat in this district.”

On this Lawrence gets whole hearted agreement. There may be disagreement as to where the “fat” is, but you heard it from the TFT President herself that “fat” exists.

Lawrence should be sharing these cost saving opportunities with the public. Her members draw salaries from taxpayer dollars and their ideas are an important contribution to the discussion.

So, with the 4 day work week she suggests in her comments and the “fat” that exists, does TPS really need a levy that falls entirely upon employed individuals in the TPS district?

Employee concessions, athletics, and TPS contracts were all part of the discussion. Listen to the show

Contact: John Wenzel

TPS Reneges on Promise to Longfellow Parents

WHO: Citizens to Save the Longfellow Neighborhood

WHAT: Remarks at TPS Budget Hearing

WHEN: Wednesday, March 17, 2009, 5:30-8:30 p.m.

WHERE: Start High School

WHY: Call on TPS Board to Restore Transportation

Citizens to Save the Longfellow Neighborhood was formed last year out of concern over how a land swap between Toledo Public Schools and the City of Toledo would affect students when a new Longfellow Elementary School is built.

Toledo City Council approved the Bowman Park land swap, after then-Mayor Carty Finkbeiner secured a written commitment from TPS Superintendent John Foley that the district would provide those students safe passage to school at the new site.

In a letter to the mayor dated November 24, 2009, Foley wrote: “I will commit that as a school system we intend to provide transportation to every student from Longfellow School to the new location who meets the criteria of either a mile or greater from the school or has to walk in unsafe traffic conditions.”

Now the TPS board of education is considering budget cuts that would include the elimination of school crossing guards and transportation for students who live less than two miles from school.

“TPS is reneging on a commitment made to parents and city leaders regarding student safety and now wants to embrace a plan that would place Longfellow students in harm’s way,” said John Wenzel of Citizens to Save the Longfellow Neighborhood. “District leaders will say anything to get what they want, then do whatever they want—even if it means ignoring the concerns of their bosses, the parents and taxpayers who fund TPS operations.”

Please note: Concerned parents from Citizens to Save the Longfellow Neighborhood will make statements at the TPS budget hearing to be held at Start H.S. and be available for comment to the media immediately afterward. A .pdf copy of Superintendent Foley’s letter also is attached to this email.

####

Post your questions and if we have answers, we will post the answer and all supporting documentation. If we don’t have an answer, we will endeavor to get one for you.

And your concerns and issues are?

Grove Patterson and Old West End academies have 289 and 265 students, respectively, serving a total of 524 students or just 3.5% of the 14,943 TPS elementary (K-6) students

GP has an 8 hour school day. OWE has an 8 1/2 hour day. A regular elementary school has a 6 1/4 hour day. For both GP and OWE, there are memorandums of understanding (mou) to pay teachers for the longer school day.

As with the question regarding TTA and Early College high schools in an earlier post, is it fair to 14,943 students to subsidize the education of just 524 students?

Fairness dictates that GP and OWE be considered for closing. Yet, the TPS administration despite the higher costs, does not even list these schools as options.

What makes this worse is that both GP and OWE are supposed to determine students that attend the school by lottery. However, TPS officials have been unable or unwilling to produce the results of any lottery. In addition, numerous board members and teachers have had their children and grandchildren attend the school. Were they subject to a lottery? What lottery?

Every program that is not mandated by state statutes should be evaluated. GP and OWE go above and beyond state mandates – why were they not included as possible cuts?

TPS administration is proposing to close Toledo Technology Academy and Early College High School as part of their budget cuts. Both programs are unique to our area, have successful students and appear to be very popular programs with parents

Both schools were brought to fruition through grants and special state budget allocations. Early College has a grant from KnowledgeWorks that assisted with the college tuition for classes taken by students at UT. It is expiring. TTA started with a grant from the National Science Foundation and a special line item in the state budget. The NSF grant expired some years ago and the additional state funding evaporated with the recent huge state budget deficits. Both programs were dependent upon outside financing to start the schools and to offset higher costs.

Like most “experimental” TPS programs, they were unsustainable once the additional grants and funding terminated. This is a persistent problem as those who provide these grants don’t consider the issues of sustainability. It is not built into the longer term plan for these programs.

TPS never seems to plan for the end of the outside funding and consequently never identifies ways to sustain the program when these funds are no longer available.

As of the October 2009 student enrollment counts, TTA had 172 students and Early College had an enrollment of 215 students. A total of 387 students are served by these two premier programs out of 7.435 students or just 5.2% of the high school population.

Both high schools have significantly higher costs and will no longer be supported by outside funding sources.

So, is it fair to 7,048 students to subsidize the education of just 387 students?

This is a tough question to answer but one that has to be made considering the mission of public education.

It comes down to how do you make this decision and assure that educational dollars are spent equitably.