Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Buckeye Local levy targets safety

April 30, 2013

RAYLAND - A 2.1-mill, five-year emergency levy proposed by the Buckeye Local School District is on the May 7 ballot for voters’ consideration....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(4)

Letsgetreal

May-01-13 5:39 PM

Truly sad Spanky! When you talk about children's safety, nothing is too much. The question before you is, "do you want all kids to be safe?". There is no other question. You can call it what ever you want. Compare it to Obama Care or whatever, but just be honest. If you are going to vote no, then step up and say it. Don't cry foul about taxation without representation.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SpankysLastDance

May-01-13 8:07 AM

This levy is cut and dry? No way. Nothing is cut and dry anymore. Obama Care was cut and dry! Right? I believe that a levy is basically "taxation" without representation. People who do not own property and do not pay property taxes, send their kids to public schools. The levy system is inherently unfair. Do I want someone elses kid to be safe at school? Sure I do. Should that kids parents have to pay an equal share? Absolutely! So, anyone with a brain can see that it is not a cut and dry levy, and it most certainly is not a cut and dry decision. Cameras, radios? Sure. Armed police, psychiatrists, roof-top escape hatches? Might be a bit too much.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Letsgetreal

Apr-30-13 6:19 PM

Really, Really! You can't be serious? Your comment doesn't make any sense. You say you are for safety, but the policy you quote that was mismanaged refers to safety of building (i.e. roof, toilets, concrete, etc.). This levy is cut and dry, you either want the students of Buckeye Local to be safe or you don't. The residents of Buckeye Local have the opportunity to lead instead of following. They will have resource officers in every building. Come on man, you can blame who ever you want but this is an easy choice!

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Durtyduck

Apr-30-13 3:14 PM

First and foremost I am all for the safety of the children.....BUT this district has not done their jobs in the first place as required by their own bylaws and procedures. Look it up off their web page. look under maintenance... It states that the superientendent is responsible then the Maintenance department , then the principals at each school for the SAFETY OF ALL OCCUPANTS of the physical plant (being the buildings).... I say no to "resource officers" No to a full time nurse and social workers. But if the district had been doing their jobs as outlined then we wouldn't be looking at a new levy... MISMANAGEMENT... period... hold them accountable first ... why wasn't it done like it should of been? So I oppose giving this district more money for not doing their jobs they were hired to do.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 4 of 4 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web