A NEW PROPOSAL. NOT A NEW PLAN.

INTRODUCTION

  1. November’s 2023 $140 million bond issue (Phase 1) was REJECTED by the voters.  Included in the levy were:
    • renovations, improvements and/or additions to six current school buildings
    • add on to the transportation building
    • a new Steinecker stadium entrance and restrooms
    • one new elementary school building ($36 million of the $140 million)
      Also included was:
    • Another $60 million (Phase 2) of renovation and additions would be voted on at a later date.
  2. The bond failed by a large margin. 56% or 7,471 of the voters rejected the bond.
  3. Now the Board of Education reduced the $140 million request to $88 million. Have they cut anything or are they simply phasing in the original plan?
  4. The bond and levy proposed for vote on March 19th is made up of two items:
    • a .85 mill CONTINUOUS PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT LEVY.
    • If this passes, the only way this .85 mill tax will be removed is if the board votes in the future to remove it.
    • The other will be a 36-year bond issue for $88 million to cover a new elementary, additions to 3 schools, and deferred maintenance.

COSTS

  • If a new elementary building costs $36 million, why not consider two new elementary buildings versus renovating and adding onto buildings? 57% of the Facilities Planning Committee recommended demolishing Frank and Toth Elementary and building new. Yet the board voted to add on to and renovate these buildings. Ironically, 56% of voters did not agree with the original bond, and 57% of the planning committee also voted to tear these buildings down. The Perrysburg School Board is ignoring our feedback.
  • Inflation rate was set by OFCC, 5 years ago, at 3.16%. But we all know based on our personal monthly expenses, inflation is much higher than this, some estimating it is closer to 4.65%.

OHIO FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE (OFCC)

  • The district has applied for state funding with the OFCC, however, there is no guarantee of the amount or when the funds will be received. Perrysburg is ranked 417th in line out of 609 schools for funding. Priority is based on community wealth. Perrysburg has moved up 48 spots since 2019. We are dependent on when OFCC will give us the money and there is no guarantee when the money will come.

COMMUNITY INPUT

  • Community-wide input was never solicited to gauge ideas/feedback on the plan. Less than 1% of the population had their voices heard. The Facility Planning Committee meetings were intentionally closed to the public. Citizens were not allowed in the room to listen or speak.
  • Only 50 members were selected to serve on the Facilities Planning Committee for the original bond request. Many are either current or past district employees or related to a district employee. This is a conflict of interest.
  • Hosler said he wanted to understand why the issue failed and planned to organize “listening tours” to allow community members to express their opinions and concerns, however the revised bond and levy were put on the March ballot prior to him scheduling any opportunities for the community to do so. Community members have had to apply in order to have their voices heard by a volunteer moderator.
  • The bond and levy issue we will vote on, on March 19th is broken into two parts: a 36-year bond and a continuous permanent improvement levy. This is different from before where it was just a 36-year bond. Who decided to change the angle of financing and why?
  • There is no oversight committee outside of the Board of Education that is watching what is going on with our tax dollars. It is told that Sylvania School District has an oversight committee to their board.

MISMANAGEMENT OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS

  • Why were none of the recommendations from the state district audit implemented?
  • The district continues to have extreme administrative bloat. Examples can be provided where administrators have been hired at top salaries that aren’t necessary. Our pupil-to-administrator cost is higher than the state average, but our administrators’ salaries are $20,000 per administrator higher than the state average.
  • Why is the district continuing to hold on to the Route 199 soccer fields? Is this the best use of the land and is it being financially leveraged as best as it could be?
  • The facilities plan calls for Frank Elementary to be used for a preschool. Why dedicate an entire elementary campus to opening a pre-school? Currently Perrysburg has 159 pre-school students enrolled. Frank can house over 400 students.
  • Why did the district purchase a building for $750K for the IT department when it could have been consolidated into the Commodore building?
  • The Wood County auditor just applied its increased property value estimated at 25%, thus automatically increasing the amount of tax money going to the district, without any voting. This appraisal process occurs every six years with adjustments made every three years.
  • How will this large increase in property values and more taxes figure into their inflation numbers? Factoring a 20-25% increase in value would really increase the amount of tax money they have to work with.
  • The school district pays the salaries/benefits and houses the offices of some of the Perrysburg Schools Foundation’s staff including the Director of Development. The Foundation raises private donations for projects.
    • Who is developing the job goals for this position
    • Where are the funds going that they generate and how much money has this office raised for the district each fiscal year?
    • What are their expenses each fiscal year?
  • How many students have left this district each fiscal year for the last five years?
  • Did you know the district has received an extra $4.595 million because of the 20-mil floor due to the increase in valuation of our properties which just occurred in 2023? This is taxation without representation. How has this money been used?
  • Perrysburg Schools received $1.5M from the incremental levy and .5M from new construction, so another $2 million in new money for operations. How was it spent?
  • In comparing our total cost per student to the state average, the district is about $1,000 less per student than the state. This is the result of our economically disadvantaged students at 9% compared to the state’s average of 44%. This is disingenuous and is not comparing apples to apples. Our kids started on third base, so how far do we get with each homerun?
  • Mr. Hosler claims Perrysburg’s cost per pupil is $1749 less than the state’s average. This is false when comparing apples to apples. Perrysburg has 9% of its student population considered economically disadvantaged compared to the state’s average of 44%. When taking this into consideration the difference in cost per pupil is $1000 less than the state not $1749.
  • Mr. Hosler, in a January 31, 2024 Perrysburg Messenger Journal article stated, “An additional concern [regarding adding two entirely new elementary school buildings] is the potential for creating inequity among the elementary school buildings. Deciding which students would be assigned to the new school buildings versus those remaining in the older buildings (with an average age of 54.25 years and no long-term plans or funds to address their needs) may introduce divisions.”  Yet “The ballot issue would construct a new 800 student elementary school located in the southwest area of the school district…” and “After all facilities are complete, the school district will reconfigure its elementary boundaries to distribute students more evenly across the four elementary schools” according to the Perrysburg Schools website (https://www.perrysburgschools.net/BallotIssueMarch2024.aspx).  Mr. Hosler has contradicted himself.  The issue is not and cannot be about equity; that is not possible to obtain unless all the buildings are leveled and built brand new.  The issue is the need for our public servants, our public-school administrators and board of education, to make the most fiscally responsible decisions with the utmost respect given to limited community resources, to meet the needs of our community’s children.
  • Student population has increased by 11%, the cost of support services has increased 73% and instruction has increased 58%. Even factoring in inflation, 73% increase in support services is high.
  • The 11% increase in students, resulted in a 58% cost increase in teachers but a 93% cost increase in administration. Is Perrysburg ballooning its administration?
  • Sylvania has 38 administrators for 7,558 students (199 to 1 ratio) and Perrysburg has 31 for 5,364 students (173 to 1 ratio). Sylvania has grown 9% in student population over the past 10 years and actually have a 14% DECREASE in administrators. Why is Perrysburg growing theirs exponentially?

Check back often as this list of facts and questions will be continually updated.