Massillon may replace elementary schools

[MTigers006]

Found this article of interest and wanted your opinions on it:

http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?Category=9&ID=353646&r=15&subCategoryID=0

[longtimefirsttime]

I am a little confused. From the article:
"Another stipulation for receiving state funds is that a school have at least 350 students. None of the six elementary schools - Bowers, Emerson, Franklin, Gorrell, Smith and Whittier - have the required student population, so all must be replaced with four new schools, Blosser said."

From the district website:

http://www.massillon.sparcc.org/index.php?page=Schools
Bowers-173
Emerson-217
Franklin-398
Gorrell-391
Smith-244
Whittier-357

Opened:
Whittier-1939 (addition 1957)
Emerson-1939 (addition 1958)
Franklin-1957(addition in 1965)
Gorrell-1957
Bowers-1965
Smith-1966

The report cards on the various buildings can be obtained from the Ohio department of Education.
http://ilrc.ode.state.oh.us/Schools/School_List.asp?sel=044354,Massillon%20City,Stark% 20County

Get used to hearing the term "CFAP."

I realize this will be a huge tough sell with voters, who seem to be fed up in most cases with ballot issues (Voters in South Range & Girard narrowly approved bond issues last week). However it's my opinion that our community should take advantage of this opportunity (with the state paying approximately 60% of the improvement costs). Look at buildings in other communities that have been been constructed or improved through similar monies. I know that people have fine memories of their schools. We wish they could last forever. However the reality is they don't. Look at the age of our elementary buildings. Then look at the average age of those buildings in nearby districts. I understand the current buildings aren't ready to be condemned, but remember how proud the community and students were when the new high and middle schools were built?

[MTigers006]

I know of some buildings in neighboring communities that are over 90yrs old and still serving well. I will say however some work and improvements are needed at the elementaries. However, can we really afford more taxes and bills when we havent even paid off the new buildings we have now granted the new HS will be paid off in the next few years, but you can only pay so much and with the current cost of living it would be difficult so I dont see these leveies passing if they do it will be by a very very slim margin. More than the mayors race. Im talking by 10 votes or fewer. Another problem is where to build the new buildings.

[CarlE]

I know of some buildings in neighboring communities that are over 90yrs old and still serving well. I will say however some work and improvements are needed at the elementaries. However, can we really afford more taxes and bills when we havent even paid off the new buildings we have now granted the new HS will be paid off in the next few years, but you can only pay so much and with the current cost of living it would be difficult so I dont see these leveies passing if they do it will be by a very very slim margin. More than the mayors race. Im talking by 10 votes or fewer. Another problem is where to build the new buildings.

WOW. Just think how many new gym floors you'll be able to accentuate your basement with now?

[#56tigerdad]

I wonder why we couldn't go with an East side and a West side Elementary school. You would have 2 buildings to maintain versus 6 or 4. We have 1 middle school housing 4 grade levels. Just a thought.

[Indiana95]

Here's my guess on the locations and plans for the new buildings:

Bowers - Will be rebuilt onsite and will take some Gorrell students.

Gorrell - Will be eliminated due to the fact that its current site will not meet the state required greenspace.

Emerson - Will be rebuilt at Oak Knoll Park and will take some students from Gorrell. Current site will be transfered to the City for space taken at the aprk.

Franklin - Will be rebuilt onsite.

Smith - Will be rebuilt onsite and expanded to take on students from Whittier.

Whittier - Will not be rebuilt.

[jobdone]

Why has this story not been in the Inderag?

[Spize]

I wonder why we couldn't go with an East side and a West side Elementary school. You would have 2 buildings to maintain versus 6 or 4. We have 1 middle school housing 4 grade levels. Just a thought.

That would have worked... If only the schools had not sold off the 2 pieces of land that were perfect for schools to be built on... where else is there land big enough for a new elementary school, what is centrally located on the east and west side of town? Noone thought of this?

[Obie Wan]

This could be a very bad idea. It was stupid to build the high school where it is, it was incredibly stupid to put MMS in BFE, and it would be mind-bogglingly shortsighted to eliminate neighborhood elementary schools.

This is not to say that buildings don't need to be replaced and/or renovated, but consolidation is demonstrably counterproductive.

As a general note: if Massillon is growing so much, then why are we talking about going from 9(?) elementary schools back in my day to 4 now? Why are our graduating classes 40% smaller than they were 30 years ago? Methinks that "old Massillon" is the hole in our emerging municipal donut. Rotting at the core is no recipe for long-term growth.

[orangeblood]

This could be a very bad idea. It was stupid to build the high school where it is, it was incredibly stupid to put MMS in BFE, and it would be mind-bogglingly shortsighted to eliminate neighborhood elementary schools.

This is not to say that buildings don't need to be replaced and/or renovated, but consolidation is demonstrably counterproductive.

As a general note: if Massillon is growing so much, then why are we talking about going from 9(?) elementary schools back in my day to 4 now? Why are our graduating classes 40% smaller than they were 30 years ago? Methinks that "old Massillon" is the hole in our emerging municipal donut. Rotting at the core is no recipe for long-term growth.I just love how I get attacked on these forums, while incredible baloney like this is posted and ignored because the poster is one of the house Repubs.

The locations of the high school and MMS are just fine. Gasoline was a reasonable price when construction began on both buildings. Of course we know what happened there.

Your Republican dominated state legislature will NOT build small school schools any more. They are the ones pushing the very large buildings. I am sorry you cannot go back to the days of the one room school house any more. You can get the minimum property requirements from the office of the Massillon superintendent. I am sure they will be happy to give them to you.
I personally do not care for super sized schools either, but that is the way of Republican school funding now and into the future; unless things change.:stars:

[CarlE]

Oh Lord I've heard it all now. It's Bush and the Republicans fault for the school building issue. Where does this madness end?

[orangeblood]

Oh Lord I've heard it all now. It's Bush and the Republicans fault for the school building issue. Where does this madness end?Did you read what I said? They have official requirements for new buildings. There is a minimum size, OR THEY WILL NOT PROVIDE THE FUNDING. It is a sixty forty split, between state and local voters. And, the Repubs DO control the OHIO LEGISLATURE. They made the rules for new school contruction. That is fact.

[Obie Wan]

They have official requirements for new buildings. There is a minimum size, OR THEY WILL NOT PROVIDE THE FUNDING. It is a sixty forty split, between state and local voters.
Requirements? Or recommendations?

Because, you see, when MMS was built we were told that a) we had but one chance to get that money or it was gone forever, and b) that the state required all of that land. Trouble is, neither statement was true. I read the details. Did you?

The high school should have been built downtown. They should have purchased all the junk houses between South and Penn and used that land. They could have leveraged off the library, the existing pool, and a much more convenient location.

The MMS project was a lesson in deceit and deception. Do you remember the first site they selected less than a week before the election? Swamp land, anyone? Do you remember being told that a "new downtown" would spring up around the school? Seen any new skyscrapers on the west side? Do you remember MCS maintenance employees being told to defer all but emergency repairs in the run up to the levy? Do you remember that we were also promised that MMS would raise test scores 25%? How are those kids doing out there?

It isn't about hanging on to dilapidated buildings out of some misguided sense of nostalgia. It is, however, about building and maintaining a community. You put these schools on the fringes of the district, and you make them less accessible to a larger number of students; you deter involvement and participation in school life. You build these consolidated mega schools, and you create a commuter culture. Neighborhood schools are important, as they establish a sense of identity. I'm damn glad that I got to walk by Jackman's on the way home from Longfellow; I know that the west-siders feel the same about Wattsies. I'm damn glad that I could cut class and go to Lieberman's. A trip to Central States ain't the same. I could (and did) walk to every school I ever attended in Massillon. For my money, that's a whole lot better than car pools or school buses.

It's fairly clear that the core of Massillon is being eviscerated. Look at our civic policies. All of the houses and all of the new industry are going up on the fringes of town and in other schools districts. And in the meantime, the city proper is rotting, as there's no development downtown. The city does nothing to help the schools, and the schools are doing nothing to help the city.

You think new buildings are the answer? Look to Canton. Hell, look to our middle school. Building monuments to the egos of over-zealous administrators is not sound educational policy - community involvement is. Fix what can be fixed, and replace what can't. But for God's sake, don't abdicate responsibility for your children's education to some faceless bureaucrats and politicians in Columbus because it's the easy way out. Figure out what you want, then figure out how to get it. If that's too much work for you, then get the f*ck out of the way and let the adults take over.

[orangeblood]

And in the meantime, the city proper is rotting, as there's no development downtown. .

There goes your credibility down the sewer....

[orangeblood]

The high school should have been built downtown. They should have purchased all the junk houses between South and Penn and used that land. They could have leveraged off the library, the existing pool, and a much more convenient location.



Strictly your opinion; mine says your opinion as expressed there is without merit. Btw, I BET you would not have wanted the extra taxes to do all that you have suggested here. THAT would not have been cheap, by any means.

[SuperBran]

Found this article of interest and wanted your opinions on it:

http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?Category=9&ID=353646&r=15&subCategoryID=0

which building will you try to save?

[longtimefirsttime]

It isn't about hanging on to dilapidated buildings out of some misguided sense of nostalgia. It is, however, about building and maintaining a community. You put these schools on the fringes of the district, and you make them less accessible to a larger number of students; you deter involvement and participation in school life. You build these consolidated mega schools, and you create a commuter culture. Neighborhood schools are important, as they establish a sense of identity. I'm damn glad that I got to walk by Jackman's on the way home from Longfellow; I know that the west-siders feel the same about Wattsies. I'm damn glad that I could cut class and go to Lieberman's. A trip to Central States ain't the same. I could (and did) walk to every school I ever attended in Massillon. For my money, that's a whole lot better than car pools or school buses.


Very good point.

[Kamd50]

The only thing that is constant is change. Heck, neither Jackman's or Watts exist anymore! I know what you are saying, but by and large, parents that I know really haven't had a problem with the location of either the highschool or middleschool. I never hear anyone b#$%# about it except on MP once in a great while. And if you have been in any of our elem. lately, you'd know how badly this is needed.

I know this isn't the only reason, but my first thought when I read the comment about student numbers dwindling was that for one thing, people just do not have as many kids as they used to when a lot of us were growing up. It used to be kind of rare to be an only child or even from a 2 child family. Now it is more and more common, with some couples choosing no children at all. Just a thought.

[mike_da_man13]

to me this will create the same problem as the middle school you will have more behavior problems. if you look at the high school now you'll notice a bunch of a wannabe thugs being filtered into it that werent there when i started taking classes here in 2003. Its just to hard for the teachers and administrators to take control

[orangeblood]

to me this will create the same problem as the middle school you will have more behavior problems. if you look at the high school now you'll notice a bunch of a wannabe thugs being filtered into it that werent there when i started taking classes here in 2003. Its just to hard for the teachers and administrators to take controlThis is the only valid argument against new, bigger schools. You put more kids into a building, you have what seems to be more problems because the population is bigger. That is the only argument the opposition has that holds any credence.

Btw, Mike, will you please study a grammar book? Thank you.

[Marie]

Why can Canton build their new schools in the old neighborhoods, but we seem to need acres and acres of land? The new middle school on 13th street (I believe) in Canton only has enough room for the school and parking lots.

Also I notice in every school district as soon as they build new buildings they need more operating funds. Shouldn't the new buildings be much more energy efficient and thus be less expensive to run??
Just wondering.

[Submariner]

Massillonians, I understand your frustrations and see both sides of your argument. Sorry to interupt, but I would like to see Massillon do well with this issue on new schools.

Up here in Warren, our enrollment is dropping so we did away with one elementary school. We have 4 left, and the new Harding High School under construction. Our elementary schools: The new Lincoln, and the new Willard schools are almost complete, (fighting with cost over runs), and still have two schools to go (new Jefferson and new McGuffey).

Warren was once 67,000 people. We are projected to go down to 35,000. In the next 10 years at current levels we may lose 10,000 people "exodusing" out of Warren to other areas. My high school friend is moving his family to Hilliard, (yes the same school district that won the state championship this past season). Don't be shocked to see me and my family and speedster son somewhere near Massillon in the next 5 years. I'd have to call him a TigerRaider hybrid. Could Massillon use a future Mario Manningham?

[jobdone]

Most of these posts are making mute points. I live in what would be called "The Massillon Inner City". I amm not that familiar with the boundries to use for the West Side. The boundries for the East Side I estimate to be; On the North-- Clearview Allotment; On the South--- The old State Hospital; on the East-- 17th Street NE; on the West-- the river.
NOTE THIS IS JUST THE EAST SIDE:

Most of the construction outside this area is in the Perry, Tuslaw or Jackson Towmships school districts. The Massillon School District gains no property or personal property tax from this construction. The Massillon District also gains very few students from this construction.

Any new school construction or remodeling should be in the "Inner City" where
most of the students and finances will come from. Why the hurry to deprive our students of the good times we all had at our neighberhood schools and the fun we had going to and from those schools?

This is a dumb idea that will never get a 40% funding levy passed. I sometimes think that these leaders are completely out of touch with the majority of the residents. Most of these are inner-city residents who are the ones that vote for or against Massillon School levies.

Good Lord give them some common sense.

[Tiger2001]

...what about York? Is that building still even open?

[CATS44]

A few thoughts:

1) I highly doubt that anybody who has posted on this thread, including me, has even the smallest inkling of the state requirements that go with construction of a new school building, including the ones constructed without state funds. But those familiar with the construction of WHS and MMS should be well aware of the greenspace requirements that limit the number of sites available within the geographical limits of the MCS district.

2) I have no idea if a building plan would be a good move or not at this time. Time and details will decide that. But I do know that at some point in time, school buildings age beyond their ability to meet the technological needs of the present day educational requirements, and must be replaced. Nobody can argue logically that the present WHS building far better serves our kids than the old one.

I also know that a district gets one shot to pay forty cents on the dollar for construction of new school facilities....and that construction costs do not go down. Buy a building now for ten million (just a number out of a hat) with state help or buy it for thirty million later all by ourselves. But if we take the states money, the state is gonna tell us where and what we will build. Of course, if we build without state assistance, the state is still gonna tell us what and where to build, only with slightly less restrictions.

3) To intimate that it was a stupid decision to sell off the Longfellow and LA acreage without knowing the state greenspace requirements is in itself stupid, and adds nothing to the discussion. My guess is that there is no way that the LA site would be approved by the state as a new building site. I dont know about Longfellow, but I doubt it.

4) Any thought that the site of the present day WHS was wrong is totally out of touch with the realities at the time. The cost and time it would have taken for the needed land acquisition, movement of utilities, and probable legal hassles would have been prohibitive. To meet state standards, we would have had to acquire all the land from Oak St to the Pennsy tracks.

We would not have had the campus and the convenience that we have at the present site. Not only that, but the safety and security concerns of today would be monstrous with a downtown high school built within a few yards of the street.

5) With the WHS bond payment coming off the books in the near future, and with sixty percent of the cost of new construction coming from the state, it is possible that the timing for this project would be nearly perfect, and out of pocket expenses to individual taxpayers would not be very much at all. Interests rates are relatively low, which helps a lot when millage is set.

6) Being for or against this without knowing one single fact is less than intelligent, dont you think?

[longtimefirsttime]

...what about York? Is that building still even open?
I know someone will correct me if I'm wrong here (in rapid order). It is my understanding that when the new middle school was opened, it left York with a large decrease in students (as fifth graders attended MMS). Those remaining went to Franklin. York is being used for the Adult Basic & Literacy Education program.

[Obie Wan]

I highly doubt that anybody who has posted on this thread, including me, has even the smallest inkling of the state requirements that go with construction of a new school building, including the ones constructed without state funds.
You would be wrong.

I also know that a district gets one shot to pay forty cents on the dollar for construction of new school facilities
That's twice.

Any thought that the site of the present day WHS was wrong is totally out of touch with the realities at the time. The cost and time it would have taken for the needed land acquisition, movement of utilities, and probable legal hassles would have been prohibitive. To meet state standards, we would have had to acquire all the land from Oak St to the Pennsy tracks.

We would not have had the campus and the convenience that we have at the present site. Not only that, but the safety and security concerns of today would be monstrous with a downtown high school built within a few yards of the street.

Three strikes.

[orangeblood]

That would have worked... If only the schools had not sold off the 2 pieces of land that were perfect for schools to be built on... where else is there land big enough for a new elementary school, what is centrally located on the east and west side of town? Noone thought of this?Spize, believe it or not, under the new state requirements, these two pieces of land which housed Longfellow and L.A. are too small to even house an elementary building. I know, that seems stupid, but that is the way it is with these new rules.

[orangeblood]

A few thoughts:

1) I highly doubt that anybody who has posted on this thread, including me, has even the smallest inkling of the state requirements that go with construction of a new school building, including the ones constructed without state funds. But those familiar with the construction of WHS and MMS should be well aware of the greenspace requirements that limit the number of sites available within the geographical limits of the MCS district.

2) I have no idea if a building plan would be a good move or not at this time. Time and details will decide that. But I do know that at some point in time, school buildings age beyond their ability to meet the technological needs of the present day educational requirements, and must be replaced. Nobody can argue logically that the present WHS building far better serves our kids than the old one.

I also know that a district gets one shot to pay forty cents on the dollar for construction of new school facilities....and that construction costs do not go down. Buy a building now for ten million (just a number out of a hat) with state help or buy it for thirty million later all by ourselves. But if we take the states money, the state is gonna tell us where and what we will build. Of course, if we build without state assistance, the state is still gonna tell us what and where to build, only with slightly less restrictions.

3) To intimate that it was a stupid decision to sell off the Longfellow and LA acreage without knowing the state greenspace requirements is in itself stupid, and adds nothing to the discussion. My guess is that there is no way that the LA site would be approved by the state as a new building site. I dont know about Longfellow, but I doubt it.

4) Any thought that the site of the present day WHS was wrong is totally out of touch with the realities at the time. The cost and time it would have taken for the needed land acquisition, movement of utilities, and probable legal hassles would have been prohibitive. To meet state standards, we would have had to acquire all the land from Oak St to the Pennsy tracks.

We would not have had the campus and the convenience that we have at the present site. Not only that, but the safety and security concerns of today would be monstrous with a downtown high school built within a few yards of the street.

5) With the WHS bond payment coming off the books in the near future, and with sixty percent of the cost of new construction coming from the state, it is possible that the timing for this project would be nearly perfect, and out of pocket expenses to individual taxpayers would not be very much at all. Interests rates are relatively low, which helps a lot when millage is set.

6) Being for or against this without knowing one single fact is less than intelligent, dont you think?
Cats is on the money here with all of his points. (At least he is not talking about a certain league here. :angel: )

[orangeblood]

This is a dumb idea that will never get a 40% funding levy passed. I sometimes think that these leaders are completely out of touch with the majority of the residents. Most of these are inner-city residents who are the ones that vote for or against Massillon School levies.

Good Lord give them some common sense.
What happened to that rock that you yourself said you were going to crawl back under? Your LACK of knowledge is absolutely frightening.

[CarlE]

This is a dumb idea that will never get a 40% funding levy passed. I sometimes think that these leaders are completely out of touch with the majority of the residents.

You mean the leaders that were recently elected by the MAJORITY of the residents to represent the Democratic party in November. You mean out of touch with THEIR consituency?? God, you make yourself look stupid every time you post something anymore, bitter one.

[CATS44]

ObieWan: Okay. I was wrong on the first point. I was wrong, because I didnt tell the entire truth.

I have a pretty good inkling of the state requirements. Maybe you do, too. But if you do, it means that you have been very close to one of these situations or have a direct and personal relationship to somebody who has been thru it.

As for part two, there is a very specific window of opportunity for getting state money for school construction. It is not money that is available until the end of time. If Massillon or any other community doesnt accept the offer, the state merely moves on to the next district on its list.

And if you think that the same facility we have in the new WHS could have been built downtown for the same money and in the same time span, I cant help you, because it simply isnt true. As for security of a downtown high school, it would be a nightmare.

[CATS44]

Here is the press release from the OSFC:

http://www.osfc.state.oh.us/news/news.html#08districts

[orangeblood]

Gee, I wonder if I was to tell Obie Wan that if he would invest $100,000 in a house, I would give him $150,000. I betcha he would take my money.

The principle is the same, and the money used by the OHIO SCHOOLS FACILITY organization comes from all over the state, not just the taxes here.

Let's go back in time and turn down that money for sentimental reasons. I THINK NOT! (I guess I had better mention the word sarcasm here.)

I wonder when the last time was that he has entered one of our grade schools, in particular Emerson and Whittier. The others have problems as well.

[jobdone]

CarlE and Orangeblood: Why is it that every time I post on this site, I am crucified by you two. My opinions may not agree with yours but I still make valid observations based on my past involvement with the city and participation in civic and fraternal projects.

You do a diservice to the rest of the readers of this forum by thrashing my opinions and questioning my credability. If you refrain from this and publish proof against my observations would be helpfull for the other posters and readers of these threads to make decisions on their own.

Let's stay away from pissen matches, I have strong kidneys and bladder.

[Obie Wan]

I have a pretty good inkling of the state requirements.
Can we please stop using the word "requirements"? Many of these are more properly termed "guidlelines" or "recommendations". There is a fair amount of flexibility when it comes to building facilities. The problem is that administrations like to build grandiose buildings as monuments to themselves and "evidence" of their own service and competence. Repainting guidelines as requirements gives them political cover for their otherwise wasteful and ill-advised projects.

As for part two, there is a very specific window of opportunity for getting state money for school construction. It is not money that is available until the end of time. If Massillon or any other community doesnt accept the offer, the state merely moves on to the next district on its list.
And eventually (with 3-4 years), it's your turn again. The money is not lost forever. Do you buy ill-fitting shoes because they're on sale today?

And if you think that the same facility we have in the new WHS could have been built downtown for the same money and in the same time span, I cant help you, because it simply isnt true. As for security of a downtown high school, it would be a nightmare.
There are about 40 parcels in the area bounded by South, 1st, Penn, and 3rd. A random sampling shows the average value to be about $50,000. Quick math puts that at $2 million. 50% premium puts it at $3 million. That's today. It would have been a lot cheaper then. If memory serves, the new high school cost $28 million. Not a significant deterrent to making the sensible choice, is it?

The cost issue is also a red herring, as the new school is rife with structural problems and other issues begat of poor design and sloppy contruction. Would it not have been better to do it right?

And what security? Are there pillboxes on top of the new school?

I wonder when the last time was that he has entered one of our grade schools, in particular Emerson and Whittier. The others have problems as well.
Yes, they do. However, most of the problems have to do with shoddy maintenance and neglected upkeep rather than unavoidable deterioration or inadequate design. You're treating the symptom and not the disease. If you want to spend all this money on new buildings, then you'd better hire people to take care of them properly - and get rid of the lazy and incompetent slobs who let the buildings fall apart.

I'm not adverse to replacing schools. I realize that time marches on, and the nostalgic pull of our youth is not sufficient justification for keeping the status quo. However, the converse is also true: newer is not always better. A shiny new building does not guarantee better learning. Fewer large schools does not ensure greater involvement that more neighborhood schools.

What I would like to see is a comprehensive development plan that is driven by educational need and community benefit. What we have is a proposal being justified by solely by greed. We're prostituting the future of our kids and our city. Is a quickie really all that you want?

[orangeblood]

What we have is a proposal being justified by solely by greed. We're prostituting the future of our kids and our city. Is a quickie really all that you want?
First quoted sentence: THAT is the Repub philosophy, imo. You should be very happy.

Second quoted sentence: Absolutely ridiculous; your blotated opinion again.

Third quoted sentence: Two possible meanings... 1st. Shall we make you happy by waiting until 2050 to improve learning environments and safety for kids and those who work there?

2nd. I will speak to my better half about that.:blush2:

[orangeblood]

CarlE and Orangeblood: Why is it that every time I My opinions may not agree with yours but I still make valid observations.

Let's stay away from pissen matches, I have strong kidneys and bladder.

First sentence: There is the problem, you don't have any idea how untrue most of your posts happen to be.

Second sentence: Me too. :no1:

[jobdone]

Orangeblood: The next time I see you at Aultman West, I will try to refrain from beating your pearshaped butt. You are so,so wrong about how much I know about so many things. You should make friends outside of the Tiger Booster Club. Their Ideas are not the same as most Massillonians. You have a one track mind. Most of it off the track. Don't you do anything outside Massillon Tiger Sports and hunching over your computer 24 hours per day.

I will use a quote from one of the Mayors main cadre, "GET A LIFE".

Don't try to answer this. It will only piss me off more and some of your closet skeletons could surface. I sincerely hope your good health has returned. I know how it feels to be incapacitated. In the last three years I have had two artifical knees and one hip implanted. When I die, my wife is going to sell my new parts on e-bay.

[orangeblood]

Orangeblood: The next time I see you at Aultman West, I will try to refrain from beating your pearshaped butt. You are so,so wrong about how much I know about so many things. You should make friends outside of the Tiger Booster Club. Their Ideas are not the same as most Massillonians. You have a one track mind. Most of it off the track. Don't you do anything outside Massillon Tiger Sports and hunching over your computer 24 hours per day.

I will use a quote from one of the Mayors main cadre, "GET A LIFE".

Don't try to answer this. It will only piss me off more and some of your closet skeletons could surface. I sincerely hope your good health has returned. I know how it feels to be incapacitated. In the last three years I have had two artifical knees and one hip implanted. When I die, my wife is going to sell my new parts on e-bay.


My, my. Now there is a high quality post...not.:zzz: Jobdone, this is a thread about the possibility of new elementary schools. Keep your personal animosities out of it. Your attack is entirely off topic.

[jobdone]

What the hell OB that is how I feel.

[Portage]

I have been involved in an OSFC project. It is exciting, and occasionally frustrating.

The OSFC has been around for over 10 years. The money will not flow forever. There are two major state sources of funding for OSFC projects. First, there is the tobacco settlement money. That is soon to be exhausted. Second is state general fund money put in to counter the DeRolff lawsuit situation. There is no guarantee that will continue as a funding motive. Although the OSFC has many more districts to address, a downturn in the economy could change its future. Furthermore, the state government could develop new priorities that could derail the school replacement momentum.

Once a project receives preliminary OSFC approval, the district has one year to pass a levy in order to get the state matching funds. As stated earlier, there are districts waiting in line to have an opportunity to get the funding while it exists.

One neat thing about participating in an OSFC project: During construction, you earn interest on the unspent local AND state moneys. That is used (with restrictions) to cover change orders and other cost over-runs.

Reasons to vote "yes" on a levy:
1. Get $67 in state money for every $33 in local money.
2. Lock in currently low borrowing interest rates.
3. Lock in costs for labor and materials.

Reasons to vote "no" on a levy:
1. You, as an individual taxpayer, absolutely can't afford it.
2. Willingness to wait until later.
3. Preferring to have more local control in construction decisions.
4. Understanding that this means all future costs might need to be
covered by local taxes. Arguably, the millage would be tripled.

You should consider the risk/reward factor as one aspect of your decision.

[Kamd50]

Thanks for providing the factual and informative post :thumbsup:

[longtimefirsttime]

I have been involved in an OSFC project. It is exciting, and occasionally frustrating.

The OSFC has been around for over 10 years. The money will not flow forever. There are two major state sources of funding for OSFC projects. First, there is the tobacco settlement money. That is soon to be exhausted. Second is state general fund money put in to counter the DeRolff lawsuit situation. There is no guarantee that will continue as a funding motive. Although the OSFC has many more districts to address, a downturn in the economy could change its future. Furthermore, the state government could develop new priorities that could derail the school replacement momentum.

Once a project receives preliminary OSFC approval, the district has one year to pass a levy in order to get the state matching funds. As stated earlier, there are districts waiting in line to have an opportunity to get the funding while it exists.

One neat thing about participating in an OSFC project: During construction, you earn interest on the unspent local AND state moneys. That is used (with restrictions) to cover change orders and other cost over-runs.

Reasons to vote "yes" on a levy:
1. Get $67 in state money for every $33 in local money.
2. Lock in currently low borrowing interest rates.
3. Lock in costs for labor and materials.

Reasons to vote "no" on a levy:
1. You, as an individual taxpayer, absolutely can't afford it.
2. Willingness to wait until later.
3. Preferring to have more local control in construction decisions.
4. Understanding that this means all future costs might need to be
covered by local taxes. Arguably, the millage would be tripled.

You should consider the risk/reward factor as one aspect of your decision.

Portage, thanks for bringing this to the discussion.

[orangeblood]

I have been involved in an OSFC project. It is exciting, and occasionally frustrating.

The OSFC has been around for over 10 years. The money will not flow forever. There are two major state sources of funding for OSFC projects. First, there is the tobacco settlement money. That is soon to be exhausted. Second is state general fund money put in to counter the DeRolff lawsuit situation. There is no guarantee that will continue as a funding motive. Although the OSFC has many more districts to address, a downturn in the economy could change its future. Furthermore, the state government could develop new priorities that could derail the school replacement momentum.

Once a project receives preliminary OSFC approval, the district has one year to pass a levy in order to get the state matching funds. As stated earlier, there are districts waiting in line to have an opportunity to get the funding while it exists.

One neat thing about participating in an OSFC project: During construction, you earn interest on the unspent local AND state moneys. That is used (with restrictions) to cover change orders and other cost over-runs.

Reasons to vote "yes" on a levy:
1. Get $67 in state money for every $33 in local money.
2. Lock in currently low borrowing interest rates.
3. Lock in costs for labor and materials.

Reasons to vote "no" on a levy:
1. You, as an individual taxpayer, absolutely can't afford it.
2. Willingness to wait until later.
3. Preferring to have more local control in construction decisions.
4. Understanding that this means all future costs might need to be
covered by local taxes. Arguably, the millage would be tripled.

You should consider the risk/reward factor as one aspect of your decision.
It seems to me that if you take a small risk, you get a fairly large reward.

[Obie Wan]

It seems to me that if you take a small risk, you get a fairly large reward.
How's about you define that "reward" for us? Tell us exactly what we're going to get for our money.

[orangeblood]

How's about you define that "reward" for us? Tell us exactly what we're going to get for our money.It is my money also, my friend. I pay taxes also.

I do not believe that you have been paying attention. We would be getting modern facilities that provide a good environment for teaching and learning.
I have not seen all the details spelled out yet, but I know that the new facilities would be fine.

Btw, have you ever tried to teach a group of young people on the second floor of an ancient building in September when the temperature is above ninety degrees in the room? Oh, I thought not. WELL, I HAVE DONE IT.
It is really productive when every person in the room is totally miserable. (sarcasm)

Hey Carle, it is really your buddy here that has the moths in his wallet, not me. http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/1717378/1/istockphoto_1717378_moth_wallet.jpg

[Kamd50]

It is my money also, my friend. I pay taxes also.

I do not believe that you have been paying attention. We would be getting modern facilities that provide a good environment for teaching and learning.
I have not seen all the details spelled out yet, but I know that the new facilities would be fine.

Btw, have you ever tried to teach a group of young people on the second floor of an ancient building in September when the temperature is above ninety degrees in the room? Oh, I thought not. WELL, I HAVE DONE IT.
It is really productive when every person in the room is totally miserable. (sarcasm)

Speaking on behalf of my daughter, she totally concurs with this. The stagnant heat in these buildings is not conducive to learning when the kids are all figidity, uncomfortable, sweaty, and complaining. It may also sound trivial to some, but the windows and doors are issues also. There is a constant bug problem since they do not have screens nor air conditioning. Think about it, how would you like it if you had the same situation in your homes and had to leave your windows open all day without any screen protection and then have to spend half of your time killing bees because your students are freaking out about getting stung while in class. It happens on a daily basis.

Some of the gyms are in terrible shape with the floors out of wack and retain a very disagreeable odor that cannot be gotten rid of simply because of age. There are also things like extremely out of date bathrooms and classroom sinks. One cannot really tell the true condition of these or any other school buildings merely by spending a few hours in one of them one time doing volunteer work for the day. You have to spend a regular amount of time in these places to really know what it is like, just like you do with a home.

[orangeblood]

Speaking on behalf of my daughter, she totally concurs with this. The stagnant heat in these buildings is not conducive to learning when the kids are all figidity, uncomfortable, sweaty, and complaining. It may also sound trivial to some, but the windows and doors are issues also. There is a constant bug problem since they do not have screens nor air conditioning. Think about it, how would you like it if you had the same situation in your homes and had to leave your windows open all day without any screen protection and then have to spend half of your time killing bees because your students are freaking out about getting stung while in class. It happens on a daily basis.

Some of the gyms are in terrible shape with the floors out of wack and retain a very disagreeable odor that cannot be gotten rid of simply because of age. There are also things like extremely out of date bathrooms and classroom sinks. One cannot really tell the true condition of these or any other school buildings merely by spending a few hours in one of them one time doing volunteer work for the day. You have to spend a regular amount of time in these places to really know what it is like, just like you do with a home.
100 Per Cent on the money, folks; WE HAVE A WINNER!:thanx:

[MTown]

The semantics can be worked out. If anyone has seen the insides of Emerson and Whittier, there's not even a debate if they need to be replaced.

I wish someone would give me $.67 on the dollar to build a house.

[Indiana95]

Most of these posts are making mute point.

The word is "moot". Sorry, couldn't resist...

[Obie Wan]

Btw, have you ever tried to teach a group of young people on the second floor of an ancient building in September when the temperature is above ninety degrees in the room?
Cry me a river. Why don't you grow a set and buck up? Kids learned just fine in those schools for decades. If you can't teach there, that's more of a comment on your incompetence than any impossible environment.

The stagnant heat in these buildings is not conducive to learning when the kids are all figidity, uncomfortable, sweaty, and complaining. It may also sound trivial to some, but the windows and doors are issues also. There is a constant bug problem since they do not have screens nor air conditioning.
These are mostly issues with neglected maintenance or ill-advised modifications rather than poor design. No screens? Make some. No air-conditioning? So what? Thousands of kids were educated in those schools without A/C. These buildings were designed before A/C was common - they have design features to offer some amount of relief (hint: use the transoms). Unfortunately, many of them were removed. Look at the south side of Whittier: why were all the windows bricked up?

The bulk of these complaints come across as pointless whining rather than reasoned analysis. No one has objected to the replacement of some schools - but it is absolutely mond-boggling how easily people are willing to abdicate all responsibility for their childrens' educations for the lure of some glitzy new buildings. You think that's the answer? Again, I suggest that you take a look at Canton if you do. How's that working out?

The majority of the problems with out current facilities are the result of ongoing neglect rather than systemic shortcomings. Perhaps years of indifference have taken their toll. Perhaps they are too far gone. If that's the case, you're just wasting your money if you turn new buildings over to the same losers who destroyed the old ones.

This entire project has a false sense of urgency. This isn't "found money". The availability of these funds is not unexpected. We have known for years that we'd be geting a shot at this. Why, then, were we not better prepared when our turn came? Why do we not have a detailed plan to develop schools that are a better fit for the fabric of the community? Maybe we can build a couple of schools on the state's dime and foot the bill for some others ourselves if that gives us a better solution. There is absolutely no reason that we have to take the first offer - unless, of course, everyone is just too damn lazy to do any real work.

[Seeker]

These are mostly issues with neglected maintenance or ill-advised modifications rather than poor design. No screens? Make some. No air-conditioning? So what? Thousands of kids were educated in those schools without A/C. These buildings were designed before A/C was common - they have design features to offer some amount of relief (hint: use the transoms).

Obie Wan has caused me to temporarily think outside the box.

Jackson, our friends to the north, have certainly handled things differently.

In recent years they have built a new high school and a new elementary school.
The changes to the high school went a little too far, and the voters are making them pay for the decisions they made.

But, they are still using the original three story school structure that was built in 1938. It, along with additions made in the late 1950's make up the bulk of the current middle school. The middle school has been renovated and significant changes made, but for the most part it consists of the original buildings.

The original junior high is still being used as an elementary school. I'm pretty sure its at least 45 years-old.

The two elementaries, Amherst and Lake Cable, built in the early sixties are still in use and in excellant shape.

Maintenence and continuous updating and upgrading seem to be the difference between what Massillon has done and what Jackson has done.

Our high school seems to be slowly being allowed to fall into disrepair. I have noticed a significant decline in the condiditon of the building just in the last four years.

Maybe we should ask for some answers as to why Massillon can't seem to maintain the existing structures before we continue with plans to build more new ones.

:wtf:

[CarlE]

Great points, all. Looking from afar, it sure SEEMS as if this is more a neglect of on-going maintenance than anything else. However, more important is that fact that on this thread Orangeblood was called incompetent by Obiewan, and on another one jobdone threatened to kick his ass. Our friend from The Lair is certainly not having a good week here on MP.com. LOL

[orangeblood]

Cry me a river. Why don't you grow a set and buck up? Kids learned just fine in those schools for decades. If you can't teach there, that's more of a comment on your incompetence than any impossible environment.


These are mostly issues with neglected maintenance or ill-advised modifications rather than poor design. No screens? Make some. No air-conditioning? So what? Thousands of kids were educated in those schools without A/C. These buildings were designed before A/C was common - they have design features to offer some amount of relief (hint: use the transoms). Unfortunately, many of them were removed. Look at the south side of Whittier: why were all the windows bricked up?

The bulk of these complaints come across as pointless whining rather than reasoned analysis. No one has objected to the replacement of some schools - but it is absolutely mond-boggling how easily people are willing to abdicate all responsibility for their childrens' educations for the lure of some glitzy new buildings. You think that's the answer? Again, I suggest that you take a look at Canton if you do. How's that working out?

The majority of the problems with out current facilities are the result of ongoing neglect rather than systemic shortcomings. Perhaps years of indifference have taken their toll. Perhaps they are too far gone. If that's the case, you're just wasting your money if you turn new buildings over to the same losers who destroyed the old ones.

This entire project has a false sense of urgency. This isn't "found money". The availability of these funds is not unexpected. We have known for years that we'd be geting a shot at this. Why, then, were we not better prepared when our turn came? Why do we not have a detailed plan to develop schools that are a better fit for the fabric of the community? Maybe we can build a couple of schools on the state's dime and foot the bill for some others ourselves if that gives us a better solution. There is absolutely no reason that we have to take the first offer - unless, of course, everyone is just too damn lazy to do any real work.This post shows how totally worthless your ideas are; and, I have to include, how personal you want to make your attacks when someone actually has the courage to disagree with you. Fortunately, most of the people in town are smart enough to decipher your hate filled posts.

[orangeblood]

Great points, all. Looking from afar, it sure SEEMS as if this is more a neglect of on-going maintenance than anything else. However, more important is that fact that on this thread Orangeblood was called incompetent by Obiewan, and on another one jobdone threatened to kick his ass. Our friend from The Lair is certainly not having a good week here on MP.com. LOLI think it is a great week. Someone has to
counter the repressive and downright CHEAP posts of Obie won. I wonder if he has screens or even an air conditioner in his house. If he does, that could very well show qualities of being hypocritical.

Carle, do a tour of all of the elementary schools NOW and see if he is right.
I betcha you say no.

I do not care if I get attacked for being the only Democrat here; but I have to admit, I am getting BORED with the ridiculousness of a certain person's posts. It seems personal attacks are allowed only when they are aimed at me. That might be a double standard. In fact, I believe it is.

[Seeker]

It seems personal attacks are allowed only when they are aimed at me. That might be a double standard.

I thought you were all friends.
The difficulty is, if I hassle one person who is not your friend, I have to hassle the other two who are your friends if they insult you in the same manner.

However, you can simply state that you have no friends, and I will hassle all of them for picking on you.

Fair enough?


:offtopic:

[Obie Wan]

I do not care if I get attacked for being the only Democrat here; but I have to admit, I am getting BORED with the ridiculousness of a certain person's posts.
Cheese and crackers, man - You whine like 4-year-old girl.

No one attacks you because you're a Democrat; they disagree with you because your positions are usually begat of ignorance. Your posts are nothing but empty bromides and reflexive parroting of the NEA mantra. You never offer any evidence to support any of your opinions; you never give any facts to buttress your case. You disagree with what I write? This is a pretty liberal forum here. You won't be censured if you make a strong case for any position. Why not try substance for a change?

Tell us why the schools need replaced. Give us specific examples of unfixable flaws (not just "It was tho hot!"). You did spend a lot of time in these schools, right? Tell us what's wrong with them.

If you can.

[orangeblood]

I could mention about the old plumbing, and the toilets and urinals that frequently get "stuck" and run constantly and waste your money. I could mention about the steam heat in the oldest of buildings that overheats the rooms making them like jungles even in the winter. But, you obviously do not care.

I do not know the term for the electrical problems I have witnessed with the fluorescent lights, but the fixtures in these schools are either worn out or close to being worn out.

Btw, I thought you cared about academics... If you think I am the only person who has ever complained that these working conditions destroy the learning environment, that just shows how uninformed you are. Open your wallet while you can only pay forty percent, not one hundred percent. Do not waste my money in the process.

[orangeblood]

Your posts are nothing but empty bromides and reflexive parroting of the NEA mantra.



Shows what you know; I don't even have time to read the NEA literature I get in the mail. It usually goes out with the newspapers. Gosh I hate to admit that in front of Carle. I like to keep up his illusions.:rockin:

[Obie Wan]

I could mention about the old plumbing, and the toilets and urinals that frequently get "stuck" and run constantly and waste your money. I could mention about the steam heat in the oldest of buildings that overheats the rooms making them like jungles even in the winter.
Would those or would those not be maintenance issues? You want to tear down a school because the toilet leaks? Do you buy a new car when the old one gets a flat?

I do not know the term for the electrical problems I have witnessed with the fluorescent lights, but the fixtures in these schools are either worn out or close to being worn out.
Fixtures don't "wear out"; there are no moving parts. You do occasionally have to replace the ballast in a fluorescent fixture. That's about $15-20 to replace the original part for T12 bulbs, or $20-25 to upgrade to a new electronic ballast that would allow you to use more energy efficient T8 bulbs. It takes about 5 minutes to make the change. Is this really a problem?

Open your wallet while you can only pay forty percent, not one hundred percent. Do not waste my money in the process.
Give it a rest. You didn't care about wasting my money when it was paying your salary. Buying the wrong thing because it's on sale is no bargain at all.

Perhaps you can riddle me this: The old Republic headquarters just sold for $457,000. That bulding is 88,000 square feet. It was built in 1902, and it's going to renovated to modern standards (wiring, networking, etc.). Given that the national average for new elementary school construction is about 130 square feet/student, that's the same as a school with 676 kids*. Question: how much will it cost to renovate the Republic building to modern standards? Please compare that with the cost of entirely new construction, and compare that with the cost of renovating an existing school. Then tell us how free enterprise can renovate a building for a fraction of what the BOE says it will cost.

* Last year's enrollment figures: Bowers 169, Emerson 192, Franklin 337, Gorrell 353, Smith 246, Whittier 370.

[jobdone]

Another good one Fryewood! Keep it up!

[CarlE]

Another good one Fryewood! Keep it up!

Um, that is ObieWan doing the talking.

[Seeker]

Um, that is ObieWan doing the talking.

Sorry, I deleted that post.

[austinsm11]

That's just funny.

[CarlE]

My bad.

[Obie Wan]

Sorry, I deleted that post.
What? You deleted something before we all got a chance to read it? Was it funny? Was it insulting? Was it profane?

Geez, man, don't be so quick on the trigger next time.

[Seeker]

Ok, I restored it.

It didn't matter. because the whole post was quoted in carle's response.

Apparently jobdone read your sig line and thought the post was made by fyrewood.

Either that, or he thinks that you ARE fyrewood posting under two different personas.

:stars:

[austinsm11]

I wondered why Fyrewood was always posting after OW.

[jobdone]

Sorry about that Obie Wan. We all make mistakes.