quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by 2015 Hornets[/i]
[br]I don't think it's clear that the citizens of Monroe cannot and will not take on any additional tax burden. I think everyone just wants to be positive things are being done right first. Sometimes when you tell someone no you see different options come out, like 12 months of school. Hopefully even more will come out between now and Nov and we'll get a different outcome. This election the no vote was more motivated to get to the polls, now that supporters have seen this maybe a larger percentage will get out and show their support. Just the way this simpleton sees it.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by TDdaddy[/i]
[br]Year Round??? Divided in groups??? Are siblings in the same groups???

---

quote:

---

What is the amount this will save the district since there will be increased overhead expenses from salary, electric, buses, fuel, food during the summer months that would normally be vacant. May just be me but I do not see the savings being that big of a difference.

---

quote:

---

As for year round schools and risking my children being in the winter off group that would be something that would make me consider moving to another district.

---

quote:

---

Ohio seriously needs to evaluate what it is doing WRONG with school funding. There was a thing on the new that said something like 88 of 110 (not sure of exact) school levies on the ballot failed. Not gonna get any better in November. Economy is tough and people are strapped as it is, more taxes are something people can't swallow even if it is the best thing for their kids education.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]This is a scare tactic that will not work. Options need to be looked at and the board knows that parents do not want year round school. Being a representative of the Monroe Local school district his opinion is going to be construed as what the board is looking at. His opinion has been true to what has been done in the past. I would hope that other board members will not try this tactic. Dr Fink for school board.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by blueblood[/i]
[br]Tom is getting pummeled here for this idea, but outside of "don't worry it will take care of itself", I haven't heard any other workable solutions!!!!!!

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]I would like to bring up the fact that Edgewood has added on and remodeled all of their buildings and have less students not passing the OGT than Monroe.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]Edgewood has more students and have less students still needing to pass the OGT. I agree with not putting money in the old high school but the old elementary still has about 20 rooms that can be used for students. Money could be saved by making some improvements and adding onto the building like Edgewood has done to their buildings.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]Edgewood has more students and have less students still needing to pass the OGT. I agree with not putting money in the old high school but the old elementary still has about 20 rooms that can be used for students. Money could be saved by making some improvements and adding onto the building like Edgewood has done to their buildings.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Bretland[/i]
[br]Tom,

You stated: "I completely agree that HB920 must be eliminated and the 23 mill phantom revenue clause removed from state assistance calculations. That would eliminate almost most levys."

It might eliminate local levies, BUT wouldn't the State have to significantly raise our payroll taxes? And, would we get to vote on those tax increases?

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by lak713[/i]
[br]Tom - Just to be clear, is your proposal the one listed below as Multi-Track? There seems to be some misunderstanding about your year round proposal.

Vocabulary of Year-Round Schools
(Sources: National Association for Year-Round Education, National Education Commission on Time and Learning)

Intersessions are periods of time during which the students do not officially attend school. Intersession activities can have remediation or enrichment classes as well as vacation periods.

Multi-Track (MT) year-round education is a way to enroll more students per building, usually by dividing the total number of students enrolled into groups. Several groups are always in school; one group is always on intersession.

Single-Track (ST) year-round education means that all students and teachers follow the same calendar of being in school for an instructional period or being on intersession.

Traditional Calendar (TC) is the traditional nine months instructional calendar, September through June, with 2.5 - 3 months vacation in the summer.

Year-Round Education (YRE) or extended school year means shortening vacations to add more than 180 instructional days to the school year.

Year-Round School (YRS) is a change in the calendar schedule in which students are in school for a minimum of 180 instructional days. Year-round school is an alternative schedule for learning, not an alternative curriculum. Instructional blocks of learning and intersession breaks are evenly distributed throughout a 12-month calendar year and can be of varying lengths.

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by blueblood[/i]
[br]Tom is getting pummeled here for this idea, but outside of "don't worry it will take care of itself", I haven't heard any other workable solutions!!!!!!

---

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Ursosju25[/i]
[br]What do you do about teachers?
Will certain teachers get a session off?
Will they have to work year round?

I think the last question would be NO because teachers are only contracted to work around 185 days per 365 school year. So with that said you are going to have to hire more teachers? Hire more administrators? Then other expenses will be added on also lunches,electricity etc.. So much will it cost to do all this? Estimation? Will this cause a levy to come before the voters to fund this?

I like the idea of year round school where everyone goes not where a group has it off. JMO

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]Let me ask you something. If I add a wing to either building new or old elementary and that wing or wings will hold 1300 students and I would not have to build more gyms, parking and so on, would it cost me more or less. They want to build a separate school to house 1300 k-4 students. WE have a building that will hold 650 students on Macready. If you add enough class rooms to that building to hold a total of 1300 students you have saved the tax payer money. When I say class rooms I'm talking about a wing off of the original school not a modular.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Tom Birdwell[/i]
[br]

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]Let me ask you something. If I add a wing to either building new or old elementary and that wing or wings will hold 1300 students and I would not have to build more gyms, parking and so on, would it cost me more or less. They want to build a separate school to house 1300 k-4 students. WE have a building that will hold 650 students on Macready. If you add enough class rooms to that building to hold a total of 1300 students you have saved the tax payer money. When I say class rooms I'm talking about a wing off of the original school not a modular.

---

I have answered this for you before. We can't add capacity to the old elementary school, as its core facilities, cafeteria, kitchen, gym, were designed for 450 kids and are sized for that. We already stretched them too far with the modulars. We can make some additions to the new building, but there is simply no way to put 1,300 more kids through the core of the new building either, for the same reason. If you add 1,300 kids, you need gym, cafeteria, and auditorium space for that many more kids and parents. It all scales together.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]This is a scare tactic that will not work. Options need to be looked at and the board knows that parents do not want year round school. Being a representative of the Monroe Local school district his opinion is going to be construed as what the board is looking at. His opinion has been true to what has been done in the past. I would hope that other board members will not try this tactic. Dr Fink for school board.

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by itbedave[/i]
[br]

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by Instigator[/i]
[br]This is a scare tactic that will not work. Options need to be looked at and the board knows that parents do not want year round school. Being a representative of the Monroe Local school district his opinion is going to be construed as what the board is looking at. His opinion has been true to what has been done in the past. I would hope that other board members will not try this tactic. Dr Fink for school board.

---

Maybe it scares you - but it does not scare me. It's a perfectly reasonable solution to a problem that's not going away. And I AM a parent of kids in the district and would certainly consider it - not just for it's cost-savings to the community but for the educational benefits that year-round schooling provides. Although I do not quite agree with Tom's idea for how to break up the students and the year - I would have no problem taking vacations during non-traditional times of the year. Disney in October is much less stressful than in June or July.

It is sooo easy to tear down a solution and call it a scare tactic when you don't agree with it. Very difficult to offer a solution based on fact and knowledge. Keep at it though... hopefully some of us will continue to plan more than 1 or 2 years into the future like Tom is...

---

quote:

---

[i]Originally posted by SWC[/i]
[br]As I read this thread, several thoughts go through my mind, so I'll try to be as clear as I can...

I am all for verifying the addresses of the students at least once a year. Tracy mentioned using tax documents and I think this would be the most accurate way to do it. For divorced parents (and I fall into this category), court documents could be used to support the residential status of the children NOT listed on the tax forms.

As far as year-round schooling goes, I would support this concept, but NOT under the proposal that Tom mentioned. Having a quarter of our students out at any given time would likely hinder their participation in clubs and sports. Staffing and building usage costs would increase, too. I prefer the Single Track scheduling that Ellie mentioned which is basically nine weeks on and three weeks off. I am a teacher and when doing research, I have given my students the option to learn about year-round schooling and as much as they groan when they first hear about it, they usually decide that the benefits in terms of retention and "mini-vacations" throughout the year are worth it. I know of a few districts in the Dayton area who have gone to this schedule and Franklin was considering it earlier this year. Year-round schooling is not a terrible concept, but I prefer the ST schedule.

One poster also mentioned having two neighborhood K-6 schools and turning the auxiliary gym into eight additional classrooms. I would prefer to see K-3 housed in one building and 4-6 in another and the auxiliary gym should be converted before any additional funds are requested.

Buckeyenut also mentioned class sizes. I can't tell you what a huge difference it makes to have 20...25...or 30 students in a classroom. The larger the class, the more time you spend addressing discipline issues. My smallest class was 12 and this only happened once! My class sizes are usually 24 to 28 and I have found those numbers to be quite manageable.

---