| |
Welcome to the new home of Lee's Summit Tribune. We are dedicated to providing you the most current and accurate news and events in Lee's Summit
|
|
Home
»
Opinion
»
Jeff Tindle Member Board of Education, Lee’s...
|
|
|
| | |
|
 | |  |
|
Jeff Tindle Member Board of Education, Lee’s Summit R-7 School District
January 29, 2011
Dear Editor,
On February 8th, I will be voting for the Lee’s Summit R-7 School District tax levy issue to ensure that our quality schools remain strong, our property values are protected and our community continues to value families, education and children.
I would encourage you to make up your own mind on this issue but also be aware that a small group of individuals are circulating information that is inaccurate, unfair and aimed at damaging the reputations of highly qualified and dedicated educators. Here are the facts:
The school district has completed extensive “belt-tightening” through cost containment over the past three years totaling $30 million. Opponents of this issue continue to misstate that the district needs to tighten its belt and cut costs like everyone else, ignoring these facts.
The levy issue was recommended by a group of citizens from all walks of life who studied the school district’s financial crisis. Opponents of the levy have claimed that it was pushed through by district administration, once again completely false.
The February election date was recommended by the citizens’ committee for two reasons – to ensure time to plan for drastic budget cuts in 2011-12 and to provide employees who would be losing their jobs with additional time to find new jobs with other districts if the levy fails. It was not a secret campaign as opponents have claimed, and it is obvious that the school district and the many, many dedicated citizens working in favor of this are very open about the issue and the date.
Our district is fortunate to have outstanding teachers, support staff and administration. We have a highly qualified, intelligent and caring superintendent who has been targeted by the opposition group in a disappointing and harmful campaign. One particularly negative individual has chosen to tie his arguments for a “no” vote to R-7 administrator salaries, even indicating that administrator salary increases are tied to the levy – which is patently untrue. The truth is simple – R-7 administrators’ salaries rank near the middle in comparison with similar metro-area districts. I appreciate all of our school district’s leaders – past and present – and am proud to have served with them on the R-7 Board of Education for 12 years, including 3 years as President.
The levy issue is designed to keep our schools strong and thereby also ensure that our community is successful. Within the metro area, we have witnessed a number of vibrant communities decline once the reputation and quality of their schools begins to weaken. Wise business leaders understand the importance of outstanding schools to our economic climate, and many have stepped forward to endorse the levy issue for this reason. Be skeptical of the opposition's claims that turning down the levy is good for business – the opposite is true.
There's additional misinformation being circulated by this small group through letters to the editors, anonymous phone calls and other sources, but unfortunately there's not room to address all of the deceptions in this article. But quickly, if you hear from one of these individuals that the district's tax rate is the second highest in Missouri, this is complete falsehood.
You can find out much more about the levy issue, school budget reductions already made and the more extensive budget cuts that will be needed if the levy fails at the Lee’s Summit R-7 website. I would also encourage you to visit www.LSKids.org, a website provided by the Building Our Future Committee, a grassroots group of caring individuals who are committed to our schools. I might add that this group has been very open about its membership, its supporters and its efforts and has run an overwhelmingly positive campaign. I cannot say the same thing about the opposition who continues to use falsehoods and smokescreens to promote their negative, destructive views.
Jeff Tindle
Member Board of Education, Lee’s Summit R-7 School District
| |
 | |  |
| | |
|
Other Recent Articles from the Opinion Category:
| |
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Election Summary Jackson County, Missouri GENERAL ELECTION APRIL 5, 2011 (Unofficial)
|
|
|
So now we have this "crisis" that must be funded or else.... Applying leverage through emotions to get more money works only when economic times are good. Not now, definitely not now. Most people including myself want to do what is reasonable for our schools, but I think our district has become out of touch and is unable to adjust to the "new economy" like most everyone else in the normal work force has had to do. If it passes, many will begin to resent the "crown jewels" each year they pay their PP taxes.
If I hear of any more "awards" or get anymore emails, phone calls or jaded fliers, I'm gonna Hurl.Yea, we have a great district but, I feel that districts of "distinction" are not that uncommon in the nice suburbs of Mo and also have a lot to do with a low crime rate and most of all, good parents in those districts. Please make all future fliers, nauseating recorded messages, bright color paper fyers and emails pertain to my child's studies and safety only,Thank you! It has gotten to the point where I ignore all notices now due to the "please give more for the kids sake" political communications. I check the TV for snow days and that's about it.
Way to go R-7,I feel you have helped to divide a community by being a little too greedy during bad times for many.
Could the 'crown jewels" be sold off for a nice school district that does it's job well? We can. We can educate our kids very well while being more efficient.-----Voting NO------
I have read argument after argument in favor of the levy. Each supporter I have spoken to has repeated the same thing over and over again. Each time, I ask the question-what about those families that are financially challenged and can't afford the increase. How do you justify taking more money from them? Will you look them in the eyes and tell them it's okay to do without so we can continue to say we have a great school district? Or do we, the taxpayers, call on the School District to continue to tighten its belt until things turn around. The school district is a public entity supported by us-the taxpayer.
This community is not made up by the school district, the teachers or school administration alone. It is a community that is made by having a strong local government, public services, affordable housing, continued growth, local entertainment, businesses and best of all-citizens that are there for each other. Attributes that combine to make this a strong, viable community. The school district is part of that and here to provide a service for us-the citizens-taxpayers if you will. I am voting no on the levy. Not to punish the district, but to tell it right now is not the time to ask for more money. I don't disagree that we have a good school district. We do. The District will just have to do with less as other entities in Jackson County are doing why be the exception.
Does everyone realize that 30 million out of a nearly 200 million dollar budget, that's over 10%!
I know for most people, they are saying things at their jobs are "down" even 50% or more, most have lost a significant number of coworkers, and many people lucky enough to still even have a job have taken a 20% salary cut. Many of our customers have even gone completely out of business!
I don't want our school district to have to deal with any sort of reality like that!
It is getting so bad at work that I am barely able to check my Facebook and Twitter accounts during the day and keep up with the LSMO R7 Facebook and Twitter feeds. Times are tough I tell you! Luckily in addition to having Facebook and Twitter pages, the district spares no expense sending home flyers with the kids, emailing me several times a week, and robocalling me at home. Having school personnel and various resources dedicated to marketing campaigns like this does not come cheap, which further demonstrates the need for more money.
I have read that if this levy fails, I may be required to start paying directly for some extra curricular activities. This is completely unfair, as with the cuts at work and all, I am may not be able to pay for any sort of equipment required to play Lacrosse or utilize the Aquatic center. If I can't afford to pay for the gear, how will my child be able to enjoy the luxurious astroturf'ed football fields?
Instead of asking people that actually use the services to pay for the services, wouldn't it be much easier to form a citizens advisory committee, populate it largely with people friendly to the district (and maybe even some beneficiaries to their out of control spending), and then just ask them for some "advice" how to proceed? This "committee" could "advise" the board that a new tax was needed, a marketing campaign could be developed, the voters brought on board, taxes approved, then no worries! How do you think we got everything approved that we have???
The citizens of Lees Summit are so generous, they will understand and pass it. It is only money after all--and they sure seem to have plenty. In fact, they have so much, they are not even going to complain about the upcoming hikes in Electricity, Natural Gas, or $4.00 gasoline planned for later this year.
I tell you Lees Summit is literally the best place to live on earth--it is almost like a dream world!!!
I have spoken to several people on this issue and read many comments that people have posted online. Many of those people, including me, don't feel the district has explored every option. Why wouldn't the district first go to residents with children in the district before expecting all taxpayers to pay even higher taxes? Please note that I have two children in the district so this would affect me. Why weren't transportation fees and activity fees explored before attempting to raise the levy? I realize that those two things may not make up the shortfall, but if not and the levy is still necessary, it should be less than 89 cents. I've heard some people say that there are parents that can't afford those fees. I find that funny since those are the same parents that will be having to pay the higher taxes. I'm sure even renters won't be able to escape this tax as their landlords will need to raise their rent.
A survey by the Internal Affairs Ministry of Japan revealed following for year 2009 [ Source : DNA / Oct. 16, 2010 ] :
 Average income of single women [ under 30 ]………..$ 2680
 Average income of single men [ under 30 ]…………$ 2640
 Increase in women’s income [ over 5 years ]……(+) 11.4 %
 Decrease in men’s income [ over 5 years ]……( - ) 7.0 %
In most other countries, women are least concerned about catching up or overtaking their male counterparts when it comes to salary.
They are far most concerned about getting a job in the first place !
What about men in these other countries ?
They would happily accept a 25% cut in their salaries to keep their jobs !
With regards
hemen parekh
www.CustomizeResume.com
Jobs for All = Peace on Earth