If Massillon Went To Pay-To-Play....

[PurpleArmy]

As many of you know, Jackson failed their school levy a few months ago and is now going to be Pay-To-Play for this school year if they don't pass the two upcoming levies they are asking for in August.

If Massillon went to pay to play because of lack of funding, would you still pay the $375.00 per sport for your kid(s) to play?

I've been debating this, and on one hand, I want my kids to be able to be involved in the sports they want to take part in, so I'm tempted to pay whatever it takes. However, it's not going to come cheap. For example, my middle daughter, and 8th grader- plays basketball, runs track and also wants to play volleyball or softball this year. If she's in three sports, that's $1,125.00 for her alone to play sports. (Not counting my other daughter who is going to be a sophomore- pay to play is only for grades 7-12).)

I do intend to vote yes on Issues 1 and 2 for the new school levies. However, I just received a flier in the mail from Jackson schools, and it almost seems like they're threatening everyone with all types of bad things if they don't get their money for the new levies. (Making the kids have to walk to school if they live within a certain distance, etc.) I hate to give in to tactics lilke that.

If Massillon were in the same situation, what would you do? Pay the money/ vote for the levy- or stand your ground, don't give in to pay to play, and make the district accountable for their lack of good judgement as far as their spending?

[longtimefirsttime]

Well I always vote in favor of the levies. It would have to be one heckuva financial downturn for Massillon football to be pay-to-play. I would pay the money without question (life is about sacrifices). I then would make some calls to see if a donation drive could be made for disadvantaged students. That's the way it works in Massillon.

[PurpleArmy]

It's not that I have a problem with paying the money. If my kids want to play sports, then I find a way to make that happen for them. And I don't think collecting money for disadvantaged kids will be an issue in Jackson. The school will get their money.

I just am questioning why they are building a $50 million dollar addition to the high school if funding is so incredibly fragile?

I just am not pleased that the first thing they attack is sports. I'm wondering why cuts couldn't have been made someplace else? It just seems like a cheap tactic (making parents pay money so their kids can play sports) to get their way because they overspent on the high school addition.

If Massillon had done the same thing (spent too much on a building addition)- would parents in Massillon still feel OK about having to pony up the extra cash for sports? (Not just football...ALL sports.) Oh....and add band into that as well. Jackson apparently is going to make the band members pay to participate this year since they know they can then count on at LEAST 320 kids being in the Purple Army. (That comes to $4,800.00 just for the band kids)

[longtimefirsttime]

The school funding fiasco has gotten to the point that even places like Jackson and Hudson are saying "enough is enough." Jackson school officials had to know they were going to have a hard time passing that levy with that massive construction project going on. The perception, whether it's true or not, is "What else do that need? Look at that place!"

There's no question the pay to play is a tactic (and usually effective). But I would never punish my child because legislators and others can't get the job done. I'd find the money.

[PurpleArmy]

YOu're right, and I'm betting that the two new levies will pass. They've "scared" all the parents out here enough with their little fliers and threats, that I believe they'll have no problem getting their money.

[longtimefirsttime]

I hope there's not too much fallout. We need to keep the status quo over there! :grinning:

[PurpleArmy]

I kind of think it'd be funny if all the Jackson parents boycotted the pay to play thing and just kept all their kids out of sports and band this year.

I wonder how the district would get along then without all the money they make off sporting events? I bet they'd nix the pay to play thing fast enough.

[The Butler]

Oh....and add band into that as well. Jackson apparently is going to make the band members pay to participate this year since they know they can then count on at LEAST 320 kids being in the Purple Army. (That comes to $4,800.00 just for the band kids)


And no away games for the Jackson band. I'm not sure what number you were using to come up with $4,800 PA. I thought I read $70 per band member. That would be $22k plus.

The trouble is people never understand the difference between a capital levy and and operating levy. They vote for the levy that gives the district the funds to build something (new school, addition, etc.) and then wonder why the district needs more money to operate. Pay to play is often a tactic used to get levies passed. I don't think it is going to work in Jackson this time and the levy will go down. Not a negative endorsement, just a gut feeling.

[longtimefirsttime]

I kind of think it'd be funny if all the Jackson parents boycotted the pay to play thing and just kept all their kids out of sports and band this year.

I wonder how the district would get along then without all the money they make off sporting events? I bet they'd nix the pay to play thing fast enough.

Would enough people take a stance to be effective (especially in Jackson)?

[xtiger]

I was talking with my sister-in-law, whose son will be attending
Jackson Kindergarten, and they projct his graduating class to be
almost 900 kids!


You'd think as the district grew, cost would go down. Why is Jackson
hurting? I mean they are collecting a portion of all that property tax!
AND all those new homes(mansions)!

There's no end in sight.

[PurpleArmy]

You'd think as the district grew, cost would go down. Why is Jackson
hurting? I mean they are collecting a portion of all that property tax!
AND all those new homes(mansions)!

There's no end in sight.Amen!!

[PurpleArmy]

And no away games for the Jackson band. I'm not sure what number you were using to come up with $4,800 PA. I thought I read $70 per band member. That would be $22k plus.

The trouble is people never understand the difference between a capital levy and and operating levy. They vote for the levy that gives the district the funds to build something (new school, addition, etc.) and then wonder why the district needs more money to operate. Pay to play is often a tactic used to get levies passed. I don't think it is going to work in Jackson this time and the levy will go down. Not a negative endorsement, just a gut feeling.One of my daughter's friends is in band, and she told me it's the same amount for band as it is for a sport if they don't pass the levies.

[austinsm11]

I seem to remember Perry being in big financial trouble maybe 10 years go. I don't recall them having pay-to-play.

I do know that they stopped providing buses to students who I believed lived within a certain distance...two-three miles maybe.

Anyone remember what other meaures they used instead of pay-to-play.

[Marie]

The thing I don't like about the Jackson levy is that they are saying in their fliers things like "tempory relief" with a picture of a bandaide. If this is temporary relief what will they ask for next? A bigger levy for permanent relief? I will vote no.

If Massillon went to pay to play, I guess I would have to support a football player!!

[Obie Wan]

Even as the administration guts and bleeds the football program, there are legal restrictions that make pay-to-play very unlikely in Massillon.

Which is not to say that it won't be used as a threat to pass the next levy.

As for Jackson: if it costs so much to run the band, why not cut it down in size a bit (like in half)?

[PurpleArmy]

As for Jackson: if it costs so much to run the band, why not cut it down in size a bit (like in half)?
Please! That's like asking Massillon to cut their football program. We're The Purple ARMY...not the Purple Small Group of Kids.

Plus, as long as the parents pony up the cash for their kids to be in band, it doesn't matter how many are in the band. Since it's obviously not going to cost the school system anything, the size of the band really won't matter.

[xtiger]

Whoever is in charge of their (Jackson Local) advertising, is doing
a major injustice for the school and those in favor of the levy.

A quick fix, was the first thing that came to my mind when seeing
their campaign signs and literature(bandaide).

Many Jackson folks purchased new homes using adjustable rate
mortgages, now their monthly house payment has increased
dramatically, not to mention gas prices doubling!

Most people in Jackson are tapped out! However, if this levy does
pass, expect a major boom in forclosures!

[Obie Wan]

Please! That's like asking Massillon to cut their football program.
That is a deeply flawed analogy.

Plus, as long as the parents pony up the cash for their kids to be in band, it doesn't matter how many are in the band. Since it's obviously not going to cost the school system anything, the size of the band really won't matter.
Of course, serious bandies may well opt to use open enrollment to come to Massillon and play in a better band for free.

[longtimefirsttime]

Most people in Jackson are tapped out! However, if this levy does pass, expect a major boom in forclosures!

Maybe that would be a way to end all this Massillon Division 2 talk. Bring us your tired, your disgruntled, your overly financed...:biggrin:

[orangenblack]

Well, if Jackson people are so concerned about pay-to-play then sell those "shacks" and move. I get tired of hearing how Jackson residents are "tapped" out but someone tell me what their mortgage payment is over there?
WHATEVER!

[orangenblack]

How can Jackson justify $350 per sport? I know Glenoak is $250 per sport this year.

[longtimefirsttime]

How can Jackson justify $350 per sport? I know Glenoak is $250 per sport this year. Doesn't GlenOak have more students (& athletes)? That doesn't make sense.

[Obie Wan]

How can Jackson justify $350 per sport? I know Glenoak is $250 per sport this year.
Because the threat doesn't always correlate to the reality. It dosn't mean that the programs cost more in Jackson. They have it make it big enough to hurt - and $250 isn't as big of a deal to many in Jackson.

Anyway, there's always the risk that this will be viewed as an opportunity to institute a pay-as-you-go philosophy: "My kid's not in the band, why should I subsidize it? Pay for your own kids' activities."

[PurpleArmy]

That is a deeply flawed analogy.


Of course, serious bandies may well opt to use open enrollment to come to Massillon and play in a better band for free.I highly doubt that kids would transfer just for band.

Also, "better band" is not necessarily true. You're obviously biased towards MTSB, and while Massillon does have a great band, so does Jackson.

They're just two different types of bands- Massillon is a swing band, Jackson is a show band. Give credit where credit is due....or at least don't make comments like that.

[PurpleArmy]

Because the threat doesn't always correlate to the reality. It dosn't mean that the programs cost more in Jackson. They have it make it big enough to hurt - and $250 isn't as big of a deal to many in Jackson.

The actual amount is $375.00 per sport....and it IS a big deal to a LOT of people in Jackson .

The average income in Jackson is $53,391.....not that much after you factor in mortgages, living expenses, children and such.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson_Township%2C_Stark_County%2C_Ohio

[PurpleArmy]

Well, if Jackson people are so concerned about pay-to-play then sell those "shacks" and move. I get tired of hearing how Jackson residents are "tapped" out but someone tell me what their mortgage payment is over there?
WHATEVER!Not that it's anyone's business, but I purchased my home for only $132,000 two years ago. There are plenty of homes in Massillon that sell within that same price range. I'm not sure why everyone seems to think that all of us in Jackson live in $500,000 homes. Most of the residents in Jackson don't.

And I shouldn't have to sell my house and move just because of pay to play. I could just tell my kids that they won't be in sports this year. It's certainly not worth selling my home over. As for me, I'm voting for the levy- just as I voted for the last one- and if it doesn't pass, I'll pay the $375.00 per sport and call it a day.

Eventually, they'll pass a levy and things will get back to normal. And if it doesn't, I'll just continue to pay for my kids to be involved in whatever sports they want to. I'm not moving anywhere over something so small as this. :rolleyes:

[Obie Wan]

The average income in Jackson is $53,391.....not that much after you factor in mortgages, living expenses, children and such.

Which is 20% higher than the median household income in the midwest ($44,657). Cry me a river.

[longtimefirsttime]

Ah, there's nothing like a good war of words at 2 AM. You NEVER know what you will see here. It's simply not as predictable or redundant as some other sites.

[Spize]

I seem to remember Perry being in big financial trouble maybe 10 years go. I don't recall them having pay-to-play.

I do know that they stopped providing buses to students who I believed lived within a certain distance...two-three miles maybe.

Anyone remember what other meaures they used instead of pay-to-play.


I was there and in H.S. for that.

Basically if it didn't pass on the try that it did, the band members were told there would be no more band. Over half of us pledged to still go to games and take our instruments, but it never came to be because the levy passed. They were dead serious about the band and other activities.

There told those of us in activities there would be no pay-to-play, any sport or activity that couldn't pay it's own bills was done, all funding was going to be cut. So if the football team didn't sell enough tickets to pay for the stadium use and other bills, there would be no game/season. Choir and Band were definately done, that I knew.

You have to at least give them credit for that, they didn't pull the scare tactic of pay-to-play first. They just said, it isn't in the budget, the numbers are not there, GONE.

This would never work at Massillon though, the football team would be able to afford it, but they would have to be cancelled too because of the outrage of the many of the other sports not making the cut.

[Spize]

Not that it's anyone's business, but I purchased my home for only $132,000 two years ago. There are plenty of homes in Massillon that sell within that same price range. I'm not sure why everyone seems to think that all of us in Jackson live in $500,000 homes. Most of the residents in Jackson don't.

:rolleyes:

Girl Please...

That argument doesn't fly.

You want to compare some numbers, how about the low end of the price ranges? How about the high end?

The problem they are having is that there are a lot of educated people in Jackson that knows the way the taxes work.

Perhaps if they went for a NEW levy(not a renewal) at the same mils as they had people would vote for it. It would increase the revenue for the schools because it would take that milage rate at today's values, as opposed to a renewal which would be the same amount of money. It would make more sense because the people would see a tax increase at the same rate that their house's value increased (actually with the added developement with businesses in Jackson and it would be a slightly lower rate increase)

[austinsm11]

Thanks Spize. My sister went there at the time and I knew that she had to find a ride to school. I didn't realize they talking about cutting band,choir, and sports altogether.

A little disrespectful with those comments about Jackson's band.

Which is 20% higher than the median household income in the midwest ($44,657). Cry me a river.

Average and median...those the same? If you want to make a point at least compare apples to apples.

Although the average person's home/salary are going to ge higher than in Massillon, let's remember a few things. I have retired grandparents on a fixed income that have lived there for over 30 years. They can't afford more taxes year after year after year. Not everyone over there is a doctor, lawyer, etc. The sad fact is that this whole thing effects kids. There will be some kids who can't afford to be in the band or sports. Some will have to make a choice among sports and won't be able to play 2-3 sports like they used to. Yes this would cause more problems to more students in Massillon. But if it causes one child to not be able to participate that is too many. I know people would come to the aid of Massillon's students who couldn't afford to participate...especially football and band. I wonder if students/families in Jackson maybe being embarrassed to accept the help.

Something has got to be done with school funding. It doesn't matter what school district you are from. Things like this should not be happening to our kids.

[PurpleArmy]

I just hope the levies pass. I'm voting yes for them. Otherwise, with three kids in school already and a new baby on the way, I may have to tell my two oldest kids that they can only pick one sport to participate in.....and pick ONLY the one they know they will get playing time.

My middle daughter plays basketball, and runs track, but has recently been going to softball camps and wants to go out for softball, but I'm probably going to end up telling her to stick with just basketball because that's her best sport. It's not what I want to do, but it's just going to end up being too much money for us otherwise.

[PurpleArmy]

Although the average person's home/salary are going to ge higher than in Massillon, let's remember a few things. I have retired grandparents on a fixed income that have lived there for over 30 years. They can't afford more taxes year after year after year. Not everyone over there is a doctor, lawyer, etc.

Same here. My grandmother lives in Jackson and is a widow on a fixed income. She is always having a tough time making ends meet as it is, and can't afford any new taxes.

Also, many of my neighbors where I live are retired and are on fixed incomes. The ones I've talked to recently have already said they're voting no on the new levies. The ONLY reason I'm voting yes is because I have kids in Jackson schools right now.

[orangenblack]

Same here. My grandmother lives in Jackson and is a widow on a fixed income. She is always having a tough time making ends meet as it is, and can't afford any new taxes.

Also, many of my neighbors where I live are retired and are on fixed incomes. The ones I've talked to recently have already said they're voting no on the new levies. The ONLY reason I'm voting yes is because I have kids in Jackson schools right now.

So apparently the fliers have gotten to you then! I don't know how those retired residents continue to surive with the taxes increasing all the time. It is sad that you even have to think about not allowing your children to participate in sports or band. Sports is such an important aspect of the overall education, especially if your child excells in those areas.
Oh, by the way, Massillon has open enrollment and there is no pay-to-play!

[PurpleArmy]

So apparently the fliers have gotten to you then! I don't know how those retired residents continue to surive with the taxes increasing all the time. It is sad that you even have to think about not allowing your children to participate in sports or band. Sports is such an important aspect of the overall education, especially if your child excells in those areas.
Oh, by the way, Massillon has open enrollment and there is no pay-to-play!I know. I feel bad for the elderly people that can't afford the higher taxes here.

Oh, and by the way, I'm quite aware that Massillon is open enrollment, but my kids all love Jackson and have a lot of friends there, so I would never ask them to change schools.

Also, I have absolutely NO interest in driving them 1/2 hour to school each way every single day so I don't have to pay for them to play a sport. I'd probably spend WAY more than $375.00 per school year in gas running back and forth.

[Obie Wan]

I just hope the levies pass. I'm voting yes for them. Otherwise, with three kids in school already and a new baby on the way, I may have to tell my two oldest kids that they can only pick one sport to participate in.....and pick ONLY the one they know they will get playing time.
It's not like it wasn't your choice to have all of these kids, you know.

Maybe you could give up cable TV - that ought to pay for one sport for one of them. There are ways to make it happen, but it all depends on your priorities and choices.

But again, it was your choices that contributed to this situation, right?

BTW, according to the ODE, the median annual income in MCS district is $24,766. The median annual income in the Jackson Local district is $38,262. That's 54% higher. How do like them apples?

And finally, here's some interesting numbers about school revenue and expenditures for the 2004-5 school year:

.........................................MCSD . Jackson . State Avg.
Spending per pupil.................... $9,279 .. $7,937 .. $9,052
Administrative expenditures per pupil. $1,246 .... $806 .. $1,156
Revenue per pupil..................... $9,586 .. $7,396 .. $9,333
Local revenue per pupil............... $3,872 .. $5,623 .. $4,425
Avg. teacher salary.................. $45,925 . $50,086 . $49,438

[austinsm11]

It's not like it wasn't your choice to have all of these kids, you know.

Maybe you could give up cable TV - that ought to pay for one sport for one of them. There are ways to make it happen, but it all depends on your priorities and choices.

But again, it was your choices that contributed to this situation, right?

I bet if you don't feed them you could save more money for them to play sports too. Come on. This is ridiculous. Did she know when having her kids that there would be pay-to-play?

This shouldn't be happening anywhere, regardless of how well off a school system is it will be hurting kids.

[Obie Wan]

I bet if you don't feed them you could save more money for them to play sports too.
So cable TV and food are both necessities?

[austinsm11]

It's called sarcasm.

I highley doubt her cable bill is $350, which would pay for one child for one sport. Last I checked she didn't ask for advice on how to save money.

Why do you seem to be defending this whole pay-to-play thing? Rich Jackson people should all be able to afford it? What about Plain?

I know that personally if I had, say 2 kids, and just found out recently that they had to pay to play sports it would be very difficult to come up with that money, especially if they play multiple sports. I don't make a whole lot, so even cutting all of my extras would take a couple months to save.

[Obie Wan]

I highley doubt her cable bill is $350, which would pay for one child for one sport.

Let's do the math, shall we? It's not uncommon to have a cable bill of $40-50 per month. That's $480-600 per year. Seems to me that would cover one kid for one sport.

You might also note that you're defending a somewhat erratic mindset here. Look at these two quotes: "Eventually, they'll pass a levy and things will get back to normal. And if it doesn't, I'll just continue to pay for my kids to be involved in whatever sports they want to." followed by "I may have to tell my two oldest kids that they can only pick one sport to participate in. ... [I]t's just going to end up being too much money for us otherwise."

[Kamd50]

You might also note that you're defending a somewhat erratic mindset here. Look at these two quotes: "Eventually, they'll pass a levy and things will get back to normal. And if it doesn't, I'll just continue to pay for my kids to be involved in whatever sports they want to." followed by "I may have to tell my two oldest kids that they can only pick one sport to participate in. ... [I]t's just going to end up being too much money for us otherwise."[/QUOTE]

I would have to say this appears to be true. I mean it's one way or the other. On a personal note, if we had to go along with a pay to play I am positive that come hell or high water, my husband would make sure we had the money for what is most important to our kids. Which happens to be football and choir. I would have said cheerleading but we already pay for that. It would then come down to what we could and couldn't afford. It would probably come down to making choices and or saving up some of their own money if they wanted to do more than what is affordable. Our kids are used to earning their own money so if they wanted to part with some of it in order to participate in something I think it would be a good lesson for them if it was the only way they could do it.

My point being that you don't necessarily do the best thing for your children by just handing them everything they want. If they had to help fund it on their own behalf it would probably mean a lot more to them and make them more committed.

[PurpleArmy]

I bet if you don't feed them you could save more money for them to play sports too. Come on. This is ridiculous. Did she know when having her kids that there would be pay-to-play?

Thank you.

And just for the record, if MY kids had to choose between having internet and cable, and playing a sport, they'd pick cable and internet.

Also, when I had my kids, I was living in Green, so it wouldn't have mattered what was going on in Jackson. I only moved back to Jackson two years ago.

Additionally, I will find a way for my kids to play sports, and I'm quite sure I'll be able to do it WITHOUT your help or advice. But thanks anyways. :rolleyes:

[Kamd50]

I try to tell my husband all of the time that we need to stop feeding our kids if we want to ever have any extra money for anything, but no one listens:jestera:

[austinsm11]

Let's do the math, shall we? It's not uncommon to have a cable bill of $40-50 per month. That's $480-600 per year. Seems to me that would cover one kid for one sport.


When was it announced that there would be pay-to-play at Jackson? I don't think she was given a years notice to cut off the cable and save. Here is some math: Lets say that pay-to-play was mentioned in May. That gives May, June, July, August to come up with (4 x 50) $200. I seriously doubt the school would give her another 3 months to come up with it, although I could be wrong. Also, it is none of my business to tell her how to spend her money. She didn't ask what she could do to cut costs so that she would have more money to spend.



Yes her statements seem to conflict. I don't think it is anything done on purpose. If I was in the same situation I would do whatever it takes for my kids to play and for things to stay normal, which is what I think she was implying. Having said that I doubt I could afford for 3 kids to each play 2-3 sports a piece and they would probably have to choose.

Again, why is it ok for pay-to-play at Jackson and why do we seem to be defending it? What about Plain? Just because the average Jackson parent is better off than the average Plain or Massillon parent does not mean that all Jackson families will have the money to participate. This is affecting students.

[Spize]

Thank you.

And just for the record, if MY kids had to choose between having internet and cable, and playing a sport, they'd pick cable and internet.

Also, when I had my kids, I was living in Green, so it wouldn't have mattered what was going on in Jackson. I only moved back to Jackson two years ago.

Additionally, I will find a way for my kids to play sports, and I'm quite sure I'll be able to do it WITHOUT your help or advice. But thanks anyways. :rolleyes:

You know what... I have about 100 things I would like to be involved in, be a member of, or have at my house. I live in the real world and I have make choices based on what I can afford. If that means having TV and a hamburger instead of TV and a Steak, that is what I do.

Maybe each of your kids should pick 1 activity to be in until Jackson pulls out the gun and says "vote for it or no more school, because we won't run a renewal and then try for the additional" and passes the levy.

Perhaps with all the kids that are involved in multiple sports they get one free and pay-to-play any others they join after that? Maybe have a few extra fundraisers... Car Wash? Candy sales, ect... then those community members that WANT to pay extra for your kids to be in 3-4 groups each can pay and the ones on a fixed income don't have to be forced to.

BTW, your kids not eating to pay for sports may seem extreme... but you have no problem TAKING money from the grocery money of the little old lady living next to you so SHE can pay for your offspring's "fun"

[Spize]

When was it announced that there would be pay-to-play at Jackson? I don't think she was given a years notice to cut off the cable and save. Here is some math: Lets say that pay-to-play was mentioned in May. That gives May, June, July, August to come up with (4 x 50) $200. I seriously doubt the school would give her another 3 months to come up with it, although I could be wrong. Also, it is none of my business to tell her how to spend her money. She didn't ask what she could do to cut costs so that she would have more money to spend.



Yes her statements seem to conflict. I don't think it is anything done on purpose. If I was in the same situation I would do whatever it takes for my kids to play and for things to stay normal, which is what I think she was implying. Having said that I doubt I could afford for 3 kids to each play 2-3 sports a piece and they would probably have to choose.

Again, why is it ok for pay-to-play at Jackson and why do we seem to be defending it? What about Plain? Just because the average Jackson parent is better off than the average Plain or Massillon parent does not mean that all Jackson families will have the money to participate. This is affecting students.


Excuse me for not feeling bad about HER kids not being able to join as many activities as they want on my tab.

Pay-to-Play is not a threat to me if a school district pulls it... I am supposed to feel bad that a woman iwth 3 kids has to pay for HER children to do something as opposed to it coming out of my pocket, FYI I have 0 kids. If can only afford 1 sport per kid... tough cookies.

Important note, there is a key prefix used when decribing these activities... EXTRA, meaning they are not part of the curriculum, they are EXTRA. For instance if a bum comes to me asking for a dollar for food, I may give it to him, but if he comes to me for a dollar to buy a rolex... I am gonna tell him to get bent.

[PurpleArmy]

BTW, your kids not eating to pay for sports may seem extreme... but you have no problem TAKING money from the grocery money of the little old lady living next to you so SHE can pay for your offspring's "fun"
I don't feel that if the levy passes, I would be "taking money from the little old lady next door". She has the ability to go out and vote against the levies, as does every other Jackson resident.

However, if the levy passes, so be it. I am not the only person deciding on this issue in Jackson. Majority rules, and everyone will have to learn to deal with whatever the outcome is, whether they have kids in sports or not.

Also, I have no idea how well off or not the older lady next door to me is. For all I know, she could have thousands socked away in the bank, and is doing just fine, and not worried at all about the school levy. You're assuming a lot.

[Spize]

When was it announced that there would be pay-to-play at Jackson? I don't think she was given a years notice to cut off the cable and save. Here is some math: Lets say that pay-to-play was mentioned in May. That gives May, June, July, August to come up with (4 x 50) $200. I seriously doubt the school would give her another 3 months to come up with it, although I could be wrong. Also, it is none of my business to tell her how to spend her money. She didn't ask what she could do to cut costs so that she would have more money to spend.


BTW, that is $200 closer to what she needs. Maybe papajohn's instead of 91 can help, ValueTime instead of Kraft... I know when I need money for something I make sacrifices elsewhere.

[Obie Wan]

Again, why is it ok for pay-to-play at Jackson and why do we seem to be defending it? What about Plain? Just because the average Jackson parent is better off than the average Plain or Massillon parent does not mean that all Jackson families will have the money to participate. This is affecting students.
Let's get one thing straight: I don't particularly care what happens in Jackson. It wouldn't affect me at all if they simply cancelled all extra-curriculars. However, there are a couple of facts here which seem to be overlooked:
- Jackson could probably make a bunch of money to defray these costs (for the athletic department, at least) if they would end their senseless temper tantrum and schedule Massillon in football. Let's see: home-and-home, Jackson sells 9,000 tickets (6,000 @ Fife, 3,000 @ Massillon), $6/ticket = $54,000 in two years. 100 kids x $375 each x 2 years = $75,000. Whaddya know? Those 2 games alone would cover 70% of the fees paid by football players.
- As Kamd50 so astutely points out, $375 isn't a lot of money for a kid to make. You wanna play basketball? A summer job at DQ or somesuch probably pays ~$6/hour x 20 hours/week x 13 weeks = $1560 before taxes. How 'bout that?
- Look at Jackson's expenditures and revenue streams that I posted earlier. Jackson spends much less to educate each student than Massillon, yet much more of their money comes from local sources (i.e. taxes). It's understandable why people have said, "Enough!". Perhaps Jackson could benefit from making a more concerted effort to get state and Federal money (look at how much of Massillon's revenue comes from out of town).

And the big question: if you're so worried about affecting students, why aren't you railing about Massillon's abysmal academic record?

[austinsm11]

BTW, your kids not eating to pay for sports may seem extreme... but you have no problem TAKING money from the grocery money of the little old lady living next to you so SHE can pay for your offspring's "fun"

This is why I am saying there needs to be a change in the way our schools are funded. I just think that this whole thing is wrong and alot of people on here would by crying if it was Massillon in this position. I don't care what school system this may be happening in, but I don't like that it is happening at all.

Jackson doesn't get the state money that Massillon and Canton do because of how much their taxes bring in. Even if tax rates are the same, properties in Jackson have a higher value and will bring in more money. This is why systems like Massillon and Canton get more money from the state. I don't know what or how you mean about Jackson making more of an effort to get more state or federal money. If it was available to them, why wouldn't they be going for it? Why would they burden their tax payers if they could get more from the state. Perhaps you can inform PurpleArmy how it can be done so that she can let the district know and they can avoid pay-to-play altogether.

Yes a kid could earn alot of money over the summer to play sports if needed...I just don't think they should have too, especially on such short notice and on something that they previously didn't have to. Also, if I am at conditioning, lifting, open gyms, two-a-days, etc. I am probably not going to feel like working much.

Let's see. Divide your $75,000 by the 2 years and that is 37500 per year. Divide that by 350 per player and that will cover about 100 kids. That should cover football, what about the rest of the sports?

My point is this....There several ways that Jackson players, families, friends, boosters could raise the money. I just don't see why they, or any school system, should have too. There has to be a better way to fund our schools.

And the big question: if you're so worried about affecting students, why aren't you railing about Massillon's abysmal academic record?

Hmmm....show me the thread where that was brought up and where I didn't post. I am very upset about Massillon's academics. Start a thread and I would be happy to discuss!:wink:

[Obie Wan]

Jackson doesn't get the state money that Massillon and Canton do because of how much their taxes bring in. Even if tax rates are the same, properties in Jackson have a higher value and will bring in more money. This is why systems like Massillon and Canton get more money from the state.
If you take that argument to its logical conclusion, then all districts would let their levies expire and be completely funded by the state and federal governments. Think of all the money it would save local taxpayers. I wonder why no one has ever tried that.

However, it still doesn't address the question of how Jackson manages to have lower per pupil expenditures than Massillon.

My point is this....There several ways that Jackson players, families, friends, boosters could raise the money. I just don't see why they, or any school system, should have too.
I guess you find the concept of personal responsibility and the idea of work/reward to be repugnant.

[austinsm11]

Ok, then why does Massillon and Canton get more money from the state then schools like Jackson?

I am also wanting to know what/how Jackson could get more money from the state then.

Having less administrators than Massillon would decrease expenditures, wouldn't it?

I guess you find the concept of personal responsibility and the idea of work/reward to be repugnant.

I think you are taking my comments a little extreme, so I will do the same.
So why not get rid of sports altogether at every school then? For that matter, why should any person without children have to fund anything educationally related. If a child/family wants to be rewarded with sports and an education they should have to work for it all themselves. If they can't work hard and afford it...to bad.

Again, I am complaining about how our schools are funded. I still don't see why you seem to be supporting pay-to-play at Jackson.

[Kamd50]

Maybe a student shouldn't "have to" earn money to pay towards extra c's t hat they want to participate in, but if they do, what's the big deal? And that excuse about not having time if they are practicing, conditioning, etc. Does not fly. I know plenty of kids who work around those issues, including my own. There are plenty of employers in Massillon that are real good with our kids that way. They allow them to provide a schedule of those things and work around it, like on off days, weekends, etc. and of course summer and vacations;lnot to mention odd jobs like mowing,painting, and snow shoveling. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. If anything, it can only help that teen to become a more responsible adult and to have an appreciation for money rather than these kids that have everything handed to them.

[pnthrfan]

BTW, your kids not eating to pay for sports may seem extreme... but you have no problem TAKING money from the grocery money of the little old lady living next to you so SHE can pay for your offspring's "fun"

That is a ridiculous statement. Oh Yeah......you make it sound as though she holds up her neighbors and demands all of their money, so her kids can play sports. Please.
That is why these issues are put to a vote. So people have the opportunity to vote for or against them. It's a good thing that there are people out there that vote for them, can you imagine what kind of shape some of these school districts would be in if noone voted for these levies?

Pay-to-Play is not a threat to me if a school district pulls it. because you have no children....you would feel differently if you did, and this were happening in your school district.

[austinsm11]

Nice post pntherfan.

I guess we agree on the shouldn't "have to" part, Kamd. Some jobs will work around your schedules very well. I guess that I was not fortunate to work at one of these jobs during my summers in high school or college.

If I was in this situation I probably would have worked for one sport. I can't say that I would feel like working the whole summer for 2-3 sports. I would probably want to spend some of my hard earned cash on movies, music, cedarpoint, etc. I think it would be hard, especially as a teen, knowing that I didn't have to pay just last year and now I did.

[Fats]

Massillon has open enrollment. Don't pay to play send them our way.

[Kamd50]

Hard, yes maybe. But the lesson learned would be invaluable. I am all for giving what you can for your kids but at the same time having them earn that right, rather than assume things are "owed" to them just by the fact of their mere existance. Nothing makes me madder than when I see my kids starting to take things for granted or think that they are entitled to something just because they happen to "want" it. I definately don't want my kids being raised with the dillusion that they will always get whatever they want. Sometimes you have to make choices. But this is :offtopic: sorry

[PurpleArmy]

For all of you who have suggested that my kids get a job to pay for the sports they want to take part in- my middle child plays the most sports. My oldest, who will be a sophomore, told me today that she wil not run track this year regardless of PTP or not. She is concentrating on staying on the Honor Roll all thorugh high school as she wants to go to medical school after college and become an anthesthesiologist. Her main focus for the next three years is her grades- not sports. So the only kid I have to worry about as far as PTP is my middle child.

However, she is only going to be in 8th grade and just turned 13. Please feel free to enlighten me on what jobs are available to a 13 year old child so she can pay for PTP???

Certainly not working at DQ, as one of you suggested. In fact, she cannot legally get employment in Ohio until age 16.

Also, I don't expect my kids to have to earn money for sports if we go to PTP. I want them concentrating on their schoolwork and keeping good grades- not babysitting or mowing people's yards so they can play basketball or run track.

As I stated before, I'm not thrilled about forking over the money for them to be involved in sports, but if that's the way it is, then that's what we'll do. And my husband and I will pay for it- not our kids.

[Obie Wan]

Geez, if you're going to pay the money anyway, then quit yer bitchin'.

And really, the intimate insights into the dynamics if your family aren't necessary. TMI, ya know? This ain't a therapy group here.

[austinsm11]

You beat me to it PurpleArmy. I just thought about middle school kids. How would they earn the money?

You asked about jobs (and you did ask). Here are some other things she could do, so here goes:
babysitting - at what $2.00 an hour she should raise the money in no time

mow yards - maybe $10-$20 for a yard depending on the size. Don't forget to take out money for gas.

Clip coupons - save you .25 right there for each one

papergirl - I think my sister-in-law made maybe $20 for the month. I guess it depends on the size of the route.

walk dogs - couple of dollars a week

shovel snow - she can save this money for next years pay-to-play.

You better get her started pretty soon. She has alot of work to due.

It seems like people are just throwing a fit because its Jackson. I don't remember such a huge debate when it was mentioned that Plain would have it. There would be a huge uproar if it came to this in Massillon. Yes, most families can make sacrafices to see that their child can play. But there are some that can't, even if it is Jackson, Plain, Massillon, anywhere.

[Spize]

That is a ridiculous statement. Oh Yeah......you make it sound as though she holds up her neighbors and demands all of their money, so her kids can play sports. Please.
That is why these issues are put to a vote. So people have the opportunity to vote for or against them. It's a good thing that there are people out there that vote for them, can you imagine what kind of shape some of these school districts would be in if noone voted for these levies?

because you have no children....you would feel differently if you did, and this were happening in your school district.

I have no problem paying for education although I do not have kids and never will. Someone once paid for mine, and it improves my area. However why should I feel obligated if your kids wants 3,4, or 5 extras?

Maybe they should, even if the levy passes, 1 or 2 extras for free and each one after that is pay to play? (if the program is self supporting than it does not count against your free 1/2 extras)

[austinsm11]

I have no problem paying for education although I do not have kids and never will. Someone once paid for mine, and it improves my area. However why should I feel obligated if your kids wants 3,4, or 5 extras?
If they are extras, then why would you pay for 1?

No extras, does this mean no band? no speech? no yearbook? no choir? no foreign language club? no clubs at all? Sounds like a boring high school.

[Kamd50]

Personally, I don't care what or if anyone's kids do. The point here is that the question was asked of what other people would do if........... Therefore, why complain when people make suggestions? Why bother asking or making the thread in the first place if you don't want to hear what others have to say or suggest? Makes no sense. Honest to God!

I like the insinuation that "making" a child or teen work, is somehow wrong or mean or unfair to them. What? a child actually work! How cruel, LOL LOL! Or better yet, the insinuation that earning money would somehow mean the kid cannot concentrate on their grades:doh2: Point in case, besides going to school, cheering, babysitting, a "real" job, choir and women's chorus, student council, & Obie's friends, she pulls down a respectable 3.79 grade average. My graduated kids did the same, making the top 24 of the class. They are only an example, I know of plenty of others, so that is just nonsense! But whatever floats your boat is cool with me. It's not an insult or a slam or a degradation somehow to offer such advice. It's called living in the real world.

Maybe that is the difference between school districts. Maybe it's that attitude of "my kid will get whatever they want no matter what" as compared "to my kid will get what is within reason".
Maybe that is why a lot of people on a Massillon website probably don't really care one way or the other about the plight of Jackson school districts. Maybe it's the attitude that Jackson has always had towards Massillon. Thinking they are somehow better than us. Just ask Seeker about that one!

And just a little bit of FYI for ya austinism11. You are a little off base there with your estimations on what kids actually earn these days doing some of those jobs mentioned. My 13 year old son earns 20 - 40 dollars per lawn, yes per lawn and does not supply the grass. He has knocked down some serious money this summer; enough to buy his own new video game system. My daughter made 40 for babysitting 6 hrs. People do not pay 2 an hr these days lol! And delivering papers pays more than 20 bucks a month, unless you are delivering like 10 papers or something. You make that in monthly tips alone. Yes, 3 of my kids held down paper routes at different times. Just thought I'd bring ya up to speed on that:thumbsup:

[longtimefirsttime]

Maybe that is the difference between school districts. Maybe it's that attitude of "my kid will get whatever they want no matter what" as compared "to my kid will get what is within reason".
Maybe that is why a lot of people on a Massillon website probably don't really care one way or the other about the plight of Jackson school districts. Maybe it's the attitude that Jackson has always had towards Massillon. Thinking they are somehow better than us.


It's sad to see kids "get the shaft" in any school district. However I think many people do feel this way.

[PurpleArmy]

You beat me to it PurpleArmy. I just thought about middle school kids. How would they earn the money?

You asked about jobs (and you did ask). Here are some other things she could do, so here goes:
babysitting - at what $2.00 an hour she should raise the money in no time

mow yards - maybe $10-$20 for a yard depending on the size. Don't forget to take out money for gas.

Clip coupons - save you .25 right there for each one

papergirl - I think my sister-in-law made maybe $20 for the month. I guess it depends on the size of the route.

walk dogs - couple of dollars a week

shovel snow - she can save this money for next years pay-to-play.

You better get her started pretty soon. She has alot of work to due.

It seems like people are just throwing a fit because its Jackson. I don't remember such a huge debate when it was mentioned that Plain would have it. There would be a huge uproar if it came to this in Massillon. Yes, most families can make sacrafices to see that their child can play. But there are some that can't, even if it is Jackson, Plain, Massillon, anywhere.

Yeah, the middle school kids are the ones I feel badly for. Because if their parents decide not to pay their way, they're basically screwed. My daughter stayed with her Dad this summer and did some babysitting, but not everyday, and she didn't earn near what it will cost for her to play two sports.

The school should make the PTP price for 7th and 8th grade less than the high school kids, imo.

[PurpleArmy]

Personally, I don't care what or if anyone's kids do. The point here is that the question was asked of what other people would do if........... Therefore, why complain when people make suggestions? Why bother asking or making the thread in the first place if you don't want to hear what others have to say or suggest? Makes no sense. Honest to God!

If you look back at my first post on this thread, you'll notice that nowhere in the post did I ask for suggestions on how to afford PTP or whether or not I should vote for the upcoming levy.

My original question was:

"If Massillon were in the same situation, what would you do? Pay the money/ vote for the levy- or stand your ground, don't give in to pay to play, and make the district accountable for their lack of good judgement as far as their spending?"

I'm not quite sure how this thread got so far off topic or turned into a discussion about Massillon vs. Jackson. I'm just wondering what the people in Massillon would do if the tables were turned and Massillon schools were in a financial bind such as the one Jackson is in right now.

[CarlE]

Dang, with these prices you might as well send them to private school and avoid this dang heartache.

[PurpleArmy]

Dang, with these prices you might as well send them to private school and avoid this dang heartache.Pretty much! Oh well, I just hope the levy passes, and everything works out.

[austinsm11]

Your kids must be mowing some big lawns. Just curious how long it takes to mow a $40 lawn. That seems pretty high to me. My sister-in-law only had a paper route and only made around $20 per month. Yes it is a small route, but that was all that was near her house. I know you can make more with larger routes, but how do you get a larger route if it is clear across town? I don't know who would pay that much for 6 hours of babysitting. You can get day care cheaper than that. I would guess that these high amounts are paid by family friends and not by Joe Customer, although I could be wrong.
That is great that your son earned enough money to buy a video game system. I bet he takes good care of it since it came from his money. This is the kind of thing a young boy should be saving for, not to play sports at school.

Who ever said about "making" a child work" being wrong? You are kind of twisting what is being said. I said that they shouldn't "have" to, which you agreed. It is a shame that it has come to this. I think that other things at Jackson could be cut to at least lessen the blow of $350. I also saw a list of all things like books, parking fees, technology fees they have to pay. Ridiculous. I still don't see why a new funding plan for schools hasn't been found.

[Al.]

My original question was:

"If Massillon were in the same situation, what would you do? Pay the money/ vote for the levy- or stand your ground, don't give in to pay to play, and make the district accountable for their lack of good judgement as far as their spending?"

I'm not quite sure how this thread got so far off topic or turned into a discussion about Massillon vs. Jackson. I'm just wondering what the people in Massillon would do if the tables were turned and Massillon schools were in a financial bind such as the one Jackson is in right now.

IMHO:
Massillon is not in that situation (Pay to Play). You can opine as much as you want, but it is a moot point. There are other more important fish to fry facing the MCS's.

[austinsm11]

I will have to disagree with you on one thing PurpleArmy. You have mentioned that you just hope the levy passes and things will return to normal. Even if the levy passes, Jackson lowered their "asking price" and some cuts will still be made and fees charged. I believe that the would get rid of pay-to-play if passed.

I don't think things will ever return to normal until school funding is changed. If you have notice how Jackson is promoting this levy, they have used a band-aid to fix their temporary fix. Then another levy will come in 2 years or so.

[Kamd50]

Since you asked.......yes he is mowing some big lawns, spends about 2 hrs mowing, raking, and doing w/e odd things need done in a property. And no, it is not relatives/friends. Most of my kid's friends that babysit get at least 4 an hr. Just because you don't know who would pay that much, doesn't mean they don't. And the point about the paperroute, wasn't pertaining to one child in particular, it was referring to the fact that one can earn money that way.

Yes, I agreed a kid shouldn't "have to" earn the money for sports, but if they wanted to play badly enough and it was unaffordable to the family, then I wouldn't be saying oh poor so-in-so had to work for it. I'd be proud of them that they had the ambition to realize a "want" of theirs on their own.

[MUCSteelers5xSuperChamp]

Kamd50,

I personally do not like the pay-to-play format. With Jackson going to that format, do you know how much a kid's parents will have forked out when he starts in grade 7 and finishes at grade 12? I think it's $350 and after five years, a parent in Jackson will have forked out a whopping $2,100 after those years, more if they play two or three sports! Isn't that a low down dirty snake in the grass!

My parents had me working to earn money...as well. But they made that more extensive during the summer before I graduated from Canton McKinley to get me some money for books and supplies for my college classes. Oh...and don't forget my suits as well (my mother and father are very strict about my dress and attire).

I'm not a parent but if I were, I would NOT be paying for my child to play. I maintain my stance that no child has to pay just to play...they are high school kids who play because they enjoy the game!

[TigerCoach]

Any school that is "pay-to-play" should have their financials audited. If my kid were playing sports, I'd probably hate paying the participation fee, but I guarantee you one thing. I'd be all over the school administration about how they are spending money.

[Purple Hayes]

Maybe it's the attitude that Jackson has always had towards Massillon. Thinking they are somehow better than us. Just ask Seeker about that one!:thumbsup:

I don't want to veer this off-topic but how many times do Jackson fans have to hear about how Jackson and/or Federal League is inferior to Massillon, our stadium sucks, our band sucks, etc., etc.?

Addressing the question, I've yet to see where the school is losing money. Like any other business, cut your money losers (or increase the Pay to Play to make it a break-even). This has not been spelled out! If it's the Athletic Dept., then the AD/Super should be held responsible for a) not putting a good enough product on the field and b) scheduling/league affiliations (yes, I think Jackson should be playing Massillon in Week 1 instead of a home-and-home with Westerville South).

[Spize]

I don't want to veer this off-topic but how many times do Jackson fans have to hear about how Jackson and/or Federal League is inferior to Massillon, our stadium sucks, our band sucks, etc., etc.?


\


See also the tiger's lair.

[Seeker]

I don't want to veer this off-topic but how many times do Jackson fans have to hear about how Jackson and/or Federal League is inferior to Massillon, our stadium sucks, our band sucks, etc., etc.?


The answer is "As long as they chose to come to our MASSILLON site and subject themselves to it."

If Jackson ever got a site anything like MassillonProud, I could well imagine the comments about MCS that we would have to endure if we ever bothered to read it.

In the meantime, suck it up or leave us alone.

(Go back to trying to pass levies to support your programs. It would be energy better spent.)

[TigerBuckeye313]

I was very involved while I was in high school and I have had a job since I turned 16. Every employer I had allowed me to give them a schedule up to a month in advance of anything I needed off for. I don't know what the big deal is with parent's and the arguement: "I want my kids focusing on school, grades, and their extracirriculars, blah, blah, blah..." It is VERY possible to do, and I know this from expirience. I can't imagine graduating high school with no work expirience...

[Purple Hayes]

See also the tiger's lair.

What's that?

[orangeblood]

What's that?Here is the answer to your question.

www.beatmckinley.com

[Munson]

The question asked about what would Massillon do if it had pay to play has already been answered. Back when Rick Shepas first started here, there was pay to play, albeit only for a short time. There was also no bussing to the high school for awhile. Anyone remember these times? It was cheaper though and when the levy came up for vote again, guess what, it passed. The money was refunded and bussing resumed to the high school.
Perry cut bussing one time also. Then they passed a whopping 18 mil levy and guess what? Bussing resumed. The amount paid can be kept down depending if you would have a booster club supplement that sport's program.

[longtimefirsttime]

I don't want to veer this off-topic but how many times do Jackson fans have to hear about how Jackson and/or Federal League is inferior to Massillon, our stadium sucks, our band sucks, etc., etc.?


Start ANY thread on Massillon on Yappi and you will see those type of comments (and worse). Sorry, back to the topic. I gave my opinion on that on the first page.

[austinsm11]

Addressing the question, I've yet to see where the school is losing money. Like any other business, cut your money losers (or increase the Pay to Play to make it a break-even). This has not been spelled out! If it's the Athletic Dept., then the AD/Super should be held responsible for a) not putting a good enough product on the field and b) scheduling/league affiliations (yes, I think Jackson should be playing Massillon in Week 1 instead of a home-and-home with Westerville South).

Here is Jackson's website about the levy:

http://www.jacksonexcellence.com/levymath.html

Again, the temporary bandaid fix is what scares me. And don't blame all of it on Jackson, most of the problem comes from the state.




And the point about the paperroute, wasn't pertaining to one child in particular,

Isn't that what you are doing...pertaining to your one child inparticular? Yes the person I knew got paid little for a paper route. It was the only one within walking distance. I know that kids with longer paper routes will make more.


You mention your child makeing $40 for 6 hours, and then her friends make $24 for that 6 hours. Also, I need to come work for your son if he is making $40 for 2 hours of work at age 13. I don't doubt your kids might make some good money here and there, but I would say that for the average kid it isn't the norm, especially for mowing and babysitting.

[Seeker]

I think we've had enough of this.