Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.
Scott Elliott is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He writes about education, city and suburban issues, politics, business, workforce and consumer issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > November > 13 > Entry
Editorial: Backbiting can hurt Springboro kids
Springboro schools’ hopes for a fresh start were dashed on Election Day and the district is sliding even deeper into divisive turmoil.
Anger and disappointment about a school levy defeat threaten to derail the kind of community conversation that must be held for the sake of the district’s children. The schools and their critics must find a path forward.
A quick recap of the last year’s events is in order. Two new board members were elected last fall, while the incumbent board president was kicked out. By the summer, the new board president, the superintendent and the treasurer all had resigned.
On Nov. 2, a 6.83-mill levy failed — the fifth straight levy defeat. The next day the new treasurer resigned, citing “issues” with the school board.
Now board member Scott Anderson and others are charging that board member Kelly Kohls’ micromanaging is chasing off administrators and dividing the board.
A Dayton Daily News analysis of precinct-by-precinct voting on the levy showed strong support for the levy in the city, while township voters were resoundingly opposed. The analysis is further evidence of a deep philosophical divide about tax policy and the needs of the school district.
Former school board member Jim Rigano now helps run Educate Springboro, a group that is critical of the district. He argues Springboro’s spending is growing too fast, citing salary and benefits as the primary drivers.
Mr. Rigano wants school employees to pay a greater share of their ever-climbing — as is the case for everyone — health insurance costs. He also believes raises should reflect the going rate in the community, which today he pegs at about 1 percent. While teachers have agreed to forego a base pay hike this year, Mr. Rigano points out that “step” raises based on experience and education continue.
Interim Superintendent Gene Lolli argued during the levy campaign that the district was cutting where it could. Health insurance costs and raises are negotiated with the teachers’ union, which predictably resists proposals like Mr. Rigano’s.
The big-picture question is about school quality. Springboro’s kids have many advantages. The district has the highest median income in the Dayton area and the eighth-highest in the state. Its kids do well in school and perform well on state tests. The opportunity to work in an affluent community that can afford to pay well attracts some of the best teachers in the area.
If a strategy of low raises, no step increases and higher health care costs were instituted, would the district still attract the best teachers, even if its pay scale fell behind competing districts like Beavercreek and Centerville? Mr. Rigano thinks teachers would continue to flock to Springboro. Others fear the community’s reputation for great schools, which helps sustain home values, would suffer.
There needs to be an open, honest debate on the pros and cons of these differences. In that process, everyone must play fair, lay their ideas on the table and show respect to the other side.
Permalink | Comments (7) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Education, Scott Elliott, Suburban Communities
Tweet
Comments
By Budget/Power
November 13, 2010 7:33 AM | Link to this
The word budget is new to all, correct? Of course it is, admit it. Besides being political hacks, immersed in the ego booster of small town power trips, none of you have used used logic, planning, balancing operating cash available (The Budget), to determine the course of action. You used the power of the ballot to attack/defeat your educational/ political opponents. That was/is your sole purpose. The more I read about you yokels in Springboro, the more I’m believing that all of you have recently been introduced to the concept of responsibility…fiscally, and towards the education of your children. Moving out of “da hood” or your doublewide into a suburban home, with all of the new responsibilities, is lost on all of you. You’ve proven it, you’re good at it, you’ll continue your Hatfield/McCoy “fued” and entertain the rest of us with your ignorance & stupidity. You bozo’s are never going to get a viable settlement. What was that 70’s song: “Teach your children?” In Springboro, your tecnique will continue your legacy with your kids. Don’t think anything out…continue the fued. Good plan, losers.
By wake up
November 13, 2010 8:21 AM | Link to this
This is not about the children and never has been. All school districts use this same old tired fictional story. BOOHOOHOO. Plain and simple GREED
By Just on the hot seat now
November 13, 2010 8:22 AM | Link to this
Springboro is no different than many other school districts. People who have an “agenda” get on the school board for a little axe grinding. It goes on in my district as well. It would behoove all superintendents and boards to actually listen to the taxpayers for a change (if they can) since that’s where the money is coming from. Jeeez!
By livin' in the boro
November 13, 2010 11:16 AM | Link to this
Really? The board feels micromanaged? Or perhaps it is management and accountability that makes them “uncomfortable.” Making one board member a scapegoat is not the way to solve the issue. School board members need to grow up and wear their big boy/big girl panties, and stop the childish, bullying attempts to strongarm voters or other board members. I vote for the levy every time, but it is not because of the board and its tactics. Baker openly spoke to parents as if they were all ignorant and beneath him. Those remaining from his tenure, as well as some of the new board members, might attempt reaching out to the community with respect and maturity. But I won’t hold my breath.
By Max
November 14, 2010 8:13 AM | Link to this
In principle I support Rigano’s efforts. It’s the root of the problem I find myself in disagreement. Until adequate funding is addressed by the state legislature the differential burden will always be placed on the shoulders of the residents which translates into a TAX INCREASE because the state has NOT done its job. Apparently, the residents of Springboro understand this and should be applauded for their stance. It is the ultimate act of cowardice that districts use students as human shields to justify their proposed budgets when the same district boards and adminstration should be carrying the fight to Columbus where the war should be fought.
By Max
November 14, 2010 9:01 AM | Link to this
BTW, DDN’s characterization of Springboro’s levy issue as ‘backbiting’ does not speak highly of well meaning, impassioned residents on both sides of the debate. Both groups want the same thing, but it’s the means that is in dispute. Unfortunately, school districts’ budgets are functionally the same as the Dollar Store; not much in the store actually costs a dollar. Both sides might consider meeting and putting their differences before the state legislature BEFORE contemplating another levy. This could shape funding for all districts. Springboro has an opportunity to take the point position in leadership for education funding reform. Both sides are comprised of good people and, hopefully, they can see beyond the confines of local levy procedure and use their collective, creative problem solving skills to formulate a course of action to slay this state dragon of inadeqaute funding and unfunded mandates.
By Knowledge Would Go Far
November 15, 2010 1:28 PM | Link to this
It would be great if some of you posters would learn more about school funding. Its difficult but not impossible to learn. Springboro is no different than other districts, generally speaking they NEED to be on the ballot about every 3 years just to KEEP what they had. What possible greed you think school administrators and board members have is just laughable. Do you thing they get any of the money provided for kids educations? No. Why should anyone in education “give back their raises” to taxpayers? Tell me where on earth people donate money back? Do you think the need to have a masters to keep your certification (and you get to pay for it, sometimes with assistance) means you should donate? Fact: the way Ohio handles schools they have a decline in income for several years after a levy and then have to go ask for new money just to stay where they were. I don’t live in Springboro but if half the press is right the board has a BIG problem. Just one board member can make a whole board crazy. They HAVE to work together, and running your mouth is out when you are a board member, you just cannot behave like that. Other school boards are pointing to them as an example of what NOT to do….folks, the country was founded on one generation helping the next one, until now. Please be civil and help each other learn the real facts. Can the platitudes and become good neighbors again.