Marietta bond issue fails
By Kate York, kyork@mariettatimes.comArticle Photos
Fact Box
Bond issue results
For: 3,116
Against: 4,335
Marietta bond issue results
Marietta 1A: For: 107; Against: 200.
Marietta 1B: For: 219. Against: 267.
Marietta 2A: For: 246. Against: 167.
Marietta 3A: For: 219. Against: 267.
Marietta 3B: For: 171. Against: 176.
Marietta 3C: For: 93. Against: 137.
Marietta 4A: For: 141. Against: 162.
Marietta 4B: For: 223. Against: 298.
Marietta 4C: For: 99. Against: 95.
Fearing: For: 87. Against: 206.
Lawrence: For: 6. Against: 7.
Marietta East A: For: 70. Against: 236.
Marietta East B: For: 128. Against: 229.
Marietta East C: For: 106. Against: 221.
Marietta East D: For: 199. Against: 322.
Marietta West: For: 6. Against: 7.
Muskingum East A: For: 250. Against: 279.
Muskingum East B: For: 148. Against: 258.
Muskingum East C: For: 176. Against: 262.
Muskingum West: For: 195. Against: 339.
Newport Upper: For: 6. Against: 30.
With the Marietta City Schools bond issue soundly defeated by voters Tuesday, the focus for some is already on the next round of the battle to get new schools.
"We'll have to consider how soon we can get it back on the ballot," said Marietta Superintendent Herb Young. "The only reason for it not to pass is that we didn't get the message through to enough people. Once people heard the message, they supported it."
Board of education members said Tuesday night they hadn't talked yet about another go-round with the bond issue but that it's always a possibility.
"We had a lot of great help with this campaign," said board President Jack Moberg. "If we can't sell the message with that kind of support, I don't know what the answer is. I'm not pleased with the results but this is why we have elections - so the voters can speak."
The 6.54-mill bond issue/tax levy failed with 58.18 percent of voters against and 41.82 percent in favor of the issue, according to final, unofficial results. That was a total of 3,116 yes votes and 4,335 no votes.
"I'm very surprised and disappointed," said Susan Barengo, president of the bond issue committee, soon after results came in. "Our feel from our phone banks and all the things we did was that we knew it would be close but that people supported this. This was the best opportunity for us to have new schools."
The plan before voters was a $78 million construction project, with about $30 million funded by the Ohio School Facilities Commission. If the issue had passed, construction would have started in the spring on a new elementary school and high school and the current high school would have been renovated into a district middle school.
"I really believed in this project," said Barengo. "And not just for what it could do for education but what it could do for the local economy to have new facilities here."
Barengo said she thought a lot of the voters may not have been well informed about the issue.
"I really believe a lot of the voters did not come to our town meetings or call board members or call committee members to try to get information," she said.
Moberg said he was asked few questions by voters over the course of the campaign.
"I have not had a lot of people talk to me one way or the other, and maybe that's part of the problem," he said. "If people were opposed, they may have been afraid to speak up or ask questions."
Marietta resident Fran Tornes, who voted "no" on the bond issue Tuesday, said, for her, the decision was simply about timing.
"I know too many people that can't even afford an extra few dollars a month," she said. "I'd love to do something for the kids, but I can't right now. I know some people didn't like the plan and losing the neighborhood schools, but for more I think it was about the money."
The upside to the campaign process, regardless of the result, was that there is more awareness now of issues the district faces, whether they be financial, academic or facilities-related, said board member Wendy Myers.
"I'm happy that we had all the discussion and the debate that we did and that this generated interest in our schools," she said. "That's half the battle. And this was a complicated issue, so I knew it would be close."
Myers said she could understand how some parents may have voted no, without a full understanding of the benefits the project may have brought to the district.
"We have some great teachers and as a parent I'm very happy with the education my kids get," she said. "There may be those happy who didn't want to rock the boat. It's as a board member that I've become aware of the serious deficits we're going to be facing. We have to do something, and I felt this was best for our future economic situation."
|
SmokeyBear
|
|
|---|---|
|
11-10-09 8:30 AM
|
To obamunismsux: The real truth is Marietta needs a new superintendent. Dr. Baker cared about the students and the community input. Mr. Young just acts like he does, but isn't sincere. He is also rude and arrogant. Intelligent, polite people don't like that approach. Maybe the BOE should check into references before they hire the next big guy. For your information, the armory is being restored with a grant, just like the schools get tons of grant money. Not all buildings need to be torn down.
|
|
smartmom62
|
|
|
11-05-09 1:13 PM
|
Is this true, RiverRat? Which part of the Ohio Administrative Code or Revised Code backs up your statement?
|
|
RiverRat
|
|
|
11-05-09 9:09 AM
|
smartmom62 "I care a great deal about who would be leading the adminstration of a 78 million dollar effort." The state is in charge of the new construction effort. A yes vote would have taken it out of Herb's hands. If you vote to renovate, then you are putting it into Herb's hands.
|
|
SmokeyBear
|
|
|
11-05-09 8:07 AM
|
No, the BOE shouldn't put the levy on again. How much would a special election cost? Would it change anything? Seems like the people have spoken. You reap what you sow BOE and Mr. Young.
|
|
boots65
|
|
|
11-05-09 7:48 AM
|
Lizard and Sarek are the same person.
|
|
rikrab
|
|
|
11-04-09 11:23 PM
|
I wonder Will there be any retaliation/repercussion for this defeat from the BOE? Closings or layoffs?
|
|
Indian
|
|
|
11-04-09 11:09 PM
|
its the killz show all over again. Not enough with a whole website, now cluttering up the comment sections. Good night.
|
|
StoneCold
|
|
|
11-04-09 10:11 PM
|
I have enjoyed reading the posts today. For the most part they have been informative & civil. I was offended by Mr. Young’s remarks that those who voted against this levy, & yes I was one of them, were uninformed. I did my homework! I visited both of the main site giving information concerning this levy (Thank You Killmcslevy, you did an outstanding job) & talked to many people & the facts for voting no just outweighed the emotions to vote yes. We must all now face reality. That reality being that our current facilities are NOT dilapidated, unsafe eyesores that they have been portrayed as over the last few months. Our students are good kids who are getting a good education at the present time, but there is room for improvement. Improvement that can only begin when we come together to find other solutions to the issues facing us & the board starts to listen to those that elect them. They are after all there to serve us, not the other way around.
|
|
Sarek
|
|
|
11-04-09 10:04 PM
|
killmcslevy: You're just a BIG BLOWHARD. You write those fancy, smancy fact-based blogs and you don't think your poopy don't stink! You're a dweeb and a sneed! Get a real life! Vote "NO!" on the levy!
|
|
killmcslevy
|
|
|
11-04-09 9:42 PM
|
Regarding Susan Barengo -- I hope she wouldn't be surprised to read this, but I have much admiration for her energy and enthusiasm when she takes on a cause. However, I did end up posting my concerns about her seemingly obvious conflict of interest when she failed to point it out herself. I just think she could have used better judgment in becoming involved in this effort, given the "appearance of" a conflict. Even I truly doubt she pushed the levy for the personal gain aspect. She really should have at least worked behind the scenes where possible, and stayed out of the limelight just to avoid the negative perception.
|
|
killmcslevy
|
|
|
11-04-09 9:36 PM
|
(cont'd) idiot, or a mushroom (just being kept in the dark). Meanwhile, on my counterpoint blog, I tried to remain very conscious of only showing claims which were backed up by real research and facts and references. When I showed that Taylors High School, built in 1917, was completely renovated for $3.3M dollars, I had done a personal visit, obtained the names of the Architect Engineer, the construction company, everything, including hundreds of photographs, such that my "claim" was not just some speculation. I'm not trying to brag, but my point is that the reasons for being against the levy were all VERIFIED, while the reasons given to support the levy were MOSTLY just bogus guesses, lacking any verification whatsoever. Ask yourself why throughout the entire campaign, you never saw one pro-levy claim which cited a footnote or reference...NOT ONE!! Why would it be difficult to provide a complete roster of all the safety/security issues that could NOT be met by renovati
|
|
killmcslevy
|
|
|
11-04-09 9:30 PM
|
A guy in Herb Young's position should NEVER be making snide comments like, "You can grow tomatoes in January outside those old buildings", or saying, "I guarantee a half-million dollar energy savings" but when asked for the calcs that arrived at this answer, he replies that none were done; just that with new buildings it certainly should be that much....which when checked with districts who've done this showed the OPPOSITE - energy costs increased. The entire pro-levy campaign was littered with "claims" lacking any substantiation whatsoever, and many of the claims were ridiculous and offensive. When you start asking yourself how a perfectly serviceable building seemingly OVERNIGHT suddenly needs $23MILLION in renovations just to be adequate, you reach a point where you realize you're dealing with people who think they can just pass off anything as fact, regardless of how ridiculous it is. You then become very offended that you're being treated like an
|
|
smartmom62
|
|
|
11-04-09 8:47 PM
|
RiverRat, I care a great deal about who would be leading the adminstration of a 78 million dollar effort. This has nothing to do with whether Mr. Young is a life-long resident or not. I don't think it's terribly important. It has much to do with Mr. Young's previous track record. Having read Board minutes from his earlier positions, I'm struck with an impression that he seems to make decisions about how to handle things, without carefully weighing all the pertinent facts. He seems to then seek out ways to make those facts to support his decisions, and to have others support those decisions. I personally believe, that this is not the type of leadership that can properly assess whether or not a 78 million dollar building project is the most beneficial to our community. I think that's why the voters got to decide on the matter.
|
|
RiverRat
|
|
|
11-04-09 7:50 PM
|
"2)Fire Herb Young. No levy will pass while he is Superintendent. His reputation is not good (parents do look up minutes from his previous BOEs), he seems impetuous & bullying. I won't vote for any levy that he might be administering." It's not about Herb, who cares who the super is that will let go as soon as the buildings are built. That is the sole purpose of his hiring. MARIETTA NEEDS TO REALIZE THAT PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF LIFELONG MARIETTA RESIDENTS CAN HAVE GOOD IDEAS AND CONTRIBUTE TO MARIETTA.
|
|
02Much
|
|
|
11-04-09 7:22 PM
|
The previous BOE asked us to support a permanent improvement levy to repair our buildings, upgrade the technology, and make our current buildings handicap assessable. They did that with the knowledge that our region of the state was facing economic uncertainty. The voters recognized that those items were needed and worthwhile for MCS and in light of that economic uncertainty, that still remains maybe even more now than then—that levy was passed overwhelmingly by the voters of MCS. We were told to keep an eye on the progress of that levy and if the voters felt that the BOE was a good steward of those funds, they would ask for a renewal for another five years to continue the progress of improving facilities and technology. Then the BOE changed membership, somewhat, the superintendent left and we are now told that the new BOE and new superintendent decided to do nothing with those funds except use it as a carrot to get us to support the new levy. Please keep your word with those original
|
|
smartmom62
|
|
|
11-04-09 7:16 PM
|
I disagree with Ms. Barengo, but she is a good person. She is a parent who is working for what she believes would be best for our youth and our community. I'm glad the levy failed but I don't want to complain or gloat. I want our school system to become a viable, positive factor for our children and our community. The BOE needs to do 2 things: 1) LISTEN to your parents, non-parents, business & community leaders. Don't preach. 2)Fire Herb Young. No levy will pass while he is Superintendent. His reputation is not good (parents do look up minutes from his previous BOEs), he seems impetuous & bullying. I won't vote for any levy that he might be administering.
|
|
Lumberjack
|
|
|
11-04-09 7:10 PM
|
To all those who are gloating and telling those who wanted the levy to pass that they should just get over it - how would you feel if that was the argument people used when Obama was elected? "You don't like it? Get over it'. Passion is good, but the lesson that EVERYONE should take is being good winners and explaining rather than preaching will gain you more support. I applaude the passion of these posts, but there are a bunch of chest pumping and back slapping when we should be putting effort into solutions.
|
|
citizencane
|
|
|
11-04-09 6:39 PM
|
Killlevy- Okay, I see your point. I hope the board members are reading this blog. I've stated before that I went through the new construction process with a poor rural district, with very positive results. Today I've come to realize what the glaring difference is between that district and Marietta. There, the community had NO industrial tax base, and the per capita income was lower than Washington County. Yet those folks strongly supported the levy the first time it was offered. Why? Because the board, led by the superintendent, had spent the previous 10 years showing the community that they were good stewards of the district's money. They made some tough cuts, and even tougher decisions, but managed to bring the district not only out of the red but into the black WITH surplus. Therefore, they earned the community's trust. They also began the process over two years in advance, with tons of information, meetings, etc. I hope this experience will inspire our board to do the sam
|
|
digmedia
|
|
|
11-04-09 6:17 PM
|
How did a society ever survive without A/C in our school systems? It's a travesty; you know with the pain and anguish our kids have to endure because we're not willing to pay 78 million dollars for A/C. 78 million for A/C is great investment.
|
|
killmcslevy
|
|
|
11-04-09 6:09 PM
|
Hello to CitizenCane - I grew up in Belpre, and have lived in Florida and PA. My "Top 10" post only covered 10 because I actually made phone calls to all 10 of those districts, but it also became apparent that the results would remain consistent even going down through 100 or 200 schools in the list. Yes, some of the districts were "rich", for example Ottawa Hills, but there's something else about "rich" which is a political third rail -- usually the "rich" districts are demographically populated by pretty darn smart parents -- example Ottawa Hills consists of a lot of University of Toledo profs, etc Well, guess what, kids of smart parents tend to be smart kids regardless of the school funding, etc. But the real point of that blog post was to show that THESE PEOPLE COULD AFFORD to consolidate, but consciously have chosen NOT TO DO SO, even those who have built new schools. Good question, really.
|
|
OhioResident
|
|
|
11-04-09 5:36 PM
|
I'm glad my 'kids' are out of school. They were always hot and miserable in school, in August. One of my daughters passed out due to the heat..why? inadequate cooling system. I voted to have new schools built. Everyone complains when something doesn't get fixed, when someone tries to fix it, people complain yet again. Big deal if the kids have to ride a bus, I did it. It was a long ride day after day. Here I living to tell about it. Get a grip people, nothing stays the same forever! These old 'eyesore' schools need torn down! I would think you parents would want your children to be warm in the winter and cool in the summer. Wait until you get a call from school, in August, because your child has passed out from the heat.
|
|
concernedpatriot
|
|
|
11-04-09 5:12 PM
|
I think Mr. Young and The BOE learned a very good lesson last night. The power is with the voters. The voters knew what the issue was and voted with common sense. Something that is not used very often at higher levels of supposed authority.
|
|
smartmom62
|
|
|
11-04-09 4:43 PM
|
I agree with many others who have commented. Herb Young's statement in the second paragraph of today's article was pretty darned insulting. I'm amazed that he thinks that because the majority of voters chose to reject the levy, that we didn't understand what was being proposed. It seems to me that he and the BOE are the ones who, "just don't get it." The patronizing attitude Mr. Young presented, pretty much explains why this levy failed. Every single BOE meeting I've been to, has been peppered with, "You people just don't get it," when someone questions process, presents a complaint, or disagrees with a Board member. It's time for these members to stop disregarding the community members that they were elected to represent and instead disregard a plan which will not succeed in the current environment within our community. I would be happy to pay taxes for something beyond pretty buildings. Let's start improving our curriculum instead.
|
|
citizencane
|
|
|
11-04-09 4:31 PM
|
killmclevy--I do believe that you have Marietta's best interests at heart and your blog was informative. But one example--you made a big point of the Top 10 Schools. You declared that age of building had no correlation to scores. But you failed to include the fact that those districts are in some of the highest income areas of the state, with some of the highest funding per pupil. You made the number of students per building projected for Marietta appear to be a scary scenario. Shouldn't we be more worried about teacher/student ratio than number of kids in a complex? If I had an elementary child, I'd rather him/her be in a small class, among many similar classes, than in a class that's too large. Is having a school in which there are only 2 fifth grade teachers to support/interact with each other really better than having a section of classes that share curriculum, resources, ideas, etc.? I think a teacher with 18 pupils will have a better handle on a class than one with 25/more
|
|
Taxtired
|
|
|
11-04-09 4:23 PM
|
I witnessed first hand what playing nice did for the residents of Reno.Now our children ride for an hour or more.
|