TESTIMONIALS

To the Editor:

I am proud to say that I was an employee of Sidney City Schools for 19 years. During that time, I met some of the finest educators who were and are the most dedicated professionals I have ever met. Our schools have a levy on the ballot to support the staff and students of this excellent school district. One of the unique features of this levy is that it will not tax retirement income, pensions, social security and many other incomes. This is especially good news for our senior citizens of Sidney. After I retired from Sidney I went to work for the Senior Center of Sidney-Shelby County for 8 years. During that time, I met so many wonderful people who were on fixed incomes and had to be very thrifty with their money. Fortunately, we were supported by the city, the County, The United Way, and several businesses and industry so we could keep our costs down to join and participate in many activities at the center. The community of Sidney has been so supportive of all seniors. It is time for we seniors to stand up and support our children. And that can be accomplished by simply voting yes for Sidney City Schools .75% income tax. It won’t cost most seniors anything but it will go a long way to providing the best possible education for the youth and future leaders of our community. Please votes yes for our children, our staff and our future.

David McKay

Letter to Editor in Support of Sidney City Schools:

As a private-public partnership supporting economic development in Sidney and Shelby County, the Sidney Shelby Economic Partnership (SSEP) meets with business and industry on a regular bases. Rarely does a day go by when the workforce shortage does not come up in our conversations with these local businesses. School funding and support is the foundation to equip individuals with the skills necessary to fill the good-paying jobs in our community. We all want our young people to have the opportunity to earn a good education and land a good-paying job right here in Shelby County!

Several months ago while evaluating our annual progress, SSEP leadership came to the conclusion that school funding for the Sidney Public Schools is an existing roadblock that negatively impacts housing, economic development and community development. Our leadership concluded that school funding and school performance is critical to attracting talent to a community, so we decided to get involved.

The SSEP Board and nearly 40 area businesses and community organizations are presently working together to educate voters about the importance of investing in our youth, the future workforce of Sidney and Shelby County. You can learn more about why so many business leaders are supporting the May 4th Sidney City Schools Earned Income Tax Levy at the following link: https://www.sidneyschoolslevy.org/community-investment

STRONG SCHOOLS = STRONG BUSINESSES = STRONG COMMUNITY. Please get out and vote early or cast your vote on May 4th!

Martin (Mick) Given, Chairman
James A. Hill, Executive Director
Sidney-Shelby Economic Partnership

Dear Editor:

“No votes” have consequences. I have heard a lot of people say that they are all for education but they are against the way that Sidney City Schools are managed or the type of levy (earned income tax) is unfair to specific populations.

Let's explore the effective use of the "No" vote in the past ten years. Before the "1 vote" levy victory in 2009, there were several opportunities to pass a levy. Going back to 2008 there was an income tax levy that failed, followed by two failures of the 9.9 property tax. At the time people were mad that the district built buildings, some of which were built with 70% private funds. Some were mad that the Board of Education left an old and out-of-date building downtown.

The Superintendent retired and the school board had a large turnaround.

The State of Ohio made a tax cut to the Tangible Property Tax, which brought in revenue from the area industry. Seeing a budget shortfall due to the tax cut in Columbus, the district tried for an income tax to pay the bills. Had the initial income tax levy passed, it would have cost taxpayers less out of pocket and would have avoided any new monies over the next ten years. Imagine, if that had passed, the impact that would have had! No 9.9; no levy renewal failures (people were angry and voted no); and no millions of dollars lost due to lost revenue.

Can you name the superintendent who was in charge of the district at that time? He was unpopular and lasted one year before moving on to a higher-paying job in another state. That "No" vote did not improve anyone's finances and started a chain reaction that we are still experiencing.

How many major manufacturing companies, large businesses, or major restaurants have come to Sidney in that time? "No" votes were cast to punish the administration for "mismanaging funds", which were, in effect, a cut made by our state representatives, who were re-elected. That was 2008.

The "1 vote" election of 2009 was indeed controversial and by 2010 the electorate made their voice heard. Renewal levies were voted down or allowed to expire, including one that provided a bonus million dollars from the state. In essence, we voted down a levy that not only paid the bills but also paid them with State, not local, funds. We essentially voted to raise the amount of money we needed to pay to fund our schools! After that, the Superintendent (the third different one in this post) resigned to go to a job in a different district, making more money.

The Assistant Superintendent also resigned and retired- a position that has still, to this day, not been filled. Also, the following programs at Sidney High School were cut: Almost all clubs, French, photography, English electives, Social Studies electives (including the popular Military History and You & the Law), Science electives, typing classes, and full-time certified librarians (this became an aide position). Principals were cut and two buildings closed. The large exodus of experienced teachers due to retirement created a mentoring vacuum in every building. I am sure there were more cuts that I have left out.

Again, the administration who "no voters" claimed mismanaged funds and votes left the district. There was a revolving door of superintendents for a while as we had several interim superintendents (one resigned due to heart/stress issues) and at one point, the high school principal had to run both duties. I was on the hiring committee and I remember that there were 5 candidates. Two were not ready, one was removed due to ethics right before the interview and two were acceptable to consider. Our district was so undesirable to superintendents that we could not field a qualified field to select from. The effect of a "No" vote.

With an incoming superintendent, it was now time to make more cuts. The entire district took the largest salary cut in the state of Ohio! Another renewal levy failed and there was one renewal levy that was not attempted, allowing it to expire. With these non-renewals, property taxes were no longer charged and taxes went down! They have never increased!

At the same time, the NFL went on strike. Voters who backed the well-run organizations of the Cleveland Browns and Cincinnati Bengals chided teachers and staff for being greedy and "faking" a pay cut because it takes over a year to show up on the state treasurer and auditors reports. The school shooting in Newtown at Sandy Hook inspired the community to increase security measures, including physical barriers, changes to the windows and doors, increased SROs to every school in the district, and guns located in safes within each school. This increase included spikes in insurance and training. The community NEVER INCREASED the amount paid to the schools.

Like the superintendent search, it was difficult to attract teachers to the district, and positions were difficult to fill, during high unemployment... In 2014 the infamous 9.9 levy was renewed. (Thank you) It stands as the only levy that voters can vote on. Yes, salaries went back up to where they were before the cuts, as the district could neither hire nor keep young talent. New teachers were coming to the district and then leaving after a year or two to go to higher-paying jobs. The effect of a "No" vote.

As buildings deteriorated, funds were needed to repair roofs, floors, and plumbing. The gym floor was dangerous at Northwood and the annual pipe freezing in the computer lab at the high school was costing large sums for band-aid fixes. In 2016 there was an income tax levy placed on the ballot. The levy was to generate funds that could only go towards the maintenance and repair of buildings. This levy failed 60-40%. People were angry with the way things were managed. Many were still mad about “1 vote” in 2009. Many were mad about the guns. Many were mad about personnel changes. Many were mad that there was a "new stadium" (which was ten years old and paid for with private funds). The repairs were still made. The safety measures still were increased. The bills still needed to be paid. The school board and administration changed again in 2018 and renewed the 9.9 levy for a second time. (Thank you!)

Since then, there have been difficult decisions that have affected us all. We have had Covid-19, the restructuring, the pre-school, changes in administration, and test scores. All of these are discussed as reasons to vote "No".

So let me ask this, who does a "No" vote punish? History tells us that if you are punishing the top of the administration, in 20 years the average tenure of a superintendent with SCS is 2.45 years. I repeat 2.45 years! If you vote "No" because of the mismanagement of the district, you are voting to punish someone who works at the district for less than a high school student is in school!

The same goes for principals. A graduating senior last year had 5 principals! Twice an income tax levy has been voted down and we had these issues before Covid-19. Yes, the schools still functioned and I can tell you that this teacher worked 50 hour weeks during the quarantine (ask my students, they can tell you). Is the district perfect? No. Could there be improvements? Surely. Is throwing money at a problem going to fix it? No. Is withholding funds going to make the problem worse? Absolutely.

Picture a basketball player in March Madness taking a free-throw at the home basket. Can you see the home team with all of their streamers and noodles waving trying to distract the player? Trying to take their eye off of the ball...Since 2008 we have done a great job of taking the eye of the entire community off of the ball. In that time, Sidney has produced some amazing students, accomplished great things inside and outside of the classroom.

If you are voting "No" please reconsider. Who are you trying to punish? Has that worked in the past? Really...has it? Or has it really hurt those that are here for decades...Help us help the home team keep the eye on the ball.

Mike Keiser
German Teacher at Sidney High School

To the Editor:

I urge you to vote YES for the upcoming Sidney City Schools levy. My family and I came to Sidney fourteen years ago because we saw this town and its school district as vibrant middle-class American places where anyone no matter race, creed, religion, or gender could be successful. I still believe in Sidney and SCS today and much of that is because of the excellent educational opportunities available. Towns are absolutely judged by their schools and we need to make sure the next generation of young people in Sidney are given great schools.

The district’s leadership has left no stone unturned to look for potential financial savings. The earned income tax is the fairest way to tax people not cutting into fixed incomes and retirement pensions. If this levy passes our tax base will still be lower than that of Piqua, Troy, Greenville, and Vandalia. These are comparable schools in size and demographics.

Even though my children no longer attend SCS, we have always supported their levy efforts. Please join me on May 4th in voting YES in supporting our schools, our children, and the future of our great community!

Jeff Hobbs

Dear Editor:

On Tuesday, May 4, voters in the Sidney City School District will be asked to approve a 0.75% earned income tax levy that will generate $3.3 million annually for the next 10 years.

Funds generated by the levy, which does not tax retirement incomes, pensions or social security, are critical to district operations and student programs.

Passage of the levy, along with recent budget reductions, will stabilize district finances for the foreseeable future. The district has cut expenses by $3.21 million annually and will make additional reductions totaling $2.1 million for the 2021-22 school year.

Before deciding whether to support the levy, remember that strong schools build strong communities.

Rick Lewis
Chief Executive Officer
Ohio School Boards Association