Anti-Positivist

A great article from David J. Theroux

2012-01-06T22:50:00.001-05:00

For your review, here is a new article from me that draws on the work of William Cavanaugh, C.S. Lewis and others:

“Secular Theocracy: The Foundations and Folly of Modern Tyranny,” by David J.
Theroux

Part 2 will appear in January.

David J. Theroux
Founder and President
TheIndependent Institute

Adam J. White email address

2011-09-01T18:47:00.001-04:00

... is here.

Adam J. White signs available

2011-08-26T23:07:00.003-04:00

If you want a sign, leave a comment (which I will not post) that includes your name, address, and phone number, and I'll forward to Adam.

Adam J. White's Platform

2011-08-25T18:39:00.001-04:00

Adam J. White for Olentangy School Board

My name is Adam J. White and I’m running for Olentangy School Board. I work in the private sector and spend my free time studying/participating in local politics and engaging government entities through personal interaction with our political leaders, writing letters to the editor and serving on the Republican Central Committee.

Despite many interactions with Olentangy School Board members and administrators to discuss escalating taxes and problems with Olentangy’s Curriculum, my efforts have been unsuccessful. Refusing to speak, answer or acknowledge my questions, the Olentangy School Board leaves me with only one option: Acquire a seat on the Olentangy School Board to penetrate the bureaucracy and start resolving the $400 million debt and curriculum problems.

The solutions to Olentangy’s problems are:
1.Cut Taxes
2.Curb Spending
3.Construct a Better Curriculum

The Olentangy School Board is responsible for creating a debt close to half a Billion dollar$. Olentangy is taxing the private sector for overpriced debt that is beyond the useful life of their purchases. For example, purchasing books (average life span of 7 years) with bond money (a.k.a. money from a 30 year loan) and taxing the public for an additional 23 years after the books are no longer being used. Unable to stop spending, Olentangy has resorted to passing permanent levies (taxes) and 30 year bonds (taxes).

Spending on entitlements for school employees is excessive and causes financial hardship on the private sector. Healthcare, retirement, mandatory pay increases, sick leave payout, and other lavish benefits given to every Olentangy school employee lack any comparison with the realities of private sector job benefits. While the private sector must contribute funds for the retirement plans of Olentangy employees, the Olentangy Administrative staff does not contribute anything toward their own retirement and will still receive approximately 66% of their highest earned salary at retirement. The 11% extra contribution from taxpayers toward the administrative staff’s retirement is not mandated (a.k.a not required by law) and should be eliminated from taxpayers’ expense.

While healthcare premiums, deductibles and out of pocket limits have increased dramatically for private sector employees over the past few years, Olentangy has maintained its zero dollar ($0) deductible and 100% coinsurance coverage plan for its employees at the taxpayers’ expense. Changing the employee healthcare deductible from $0 to $1000 could save $1.7 million dollars annually (based on 1,718 employees). Olentangy’s refusal to address any significant benefit cuts (Salary / Benefits are approximately 85% of the budget) is leading the way for the financial collapse of Olentangy and the taxpayers that support our district.

Furthermore, Olentangy and American schools have fallen behind the rest of the world in math, science and reading with their “Diversity” curriculum. Injecting “diversity” into every subject has jeopardized the teaching of basic skills in many ways. Olentangy’s continuous improvement plan divides students by skin color rather than scholarship. Olentangy’s curriculum advocates dependence on government rather than self and steers children toward the need for public services; thereby, increasing the size and cost of government and the size of your tax bill.

If the top school in America only ranked 25th against other countries in math, then where does Olentangy rank?

Adam J. White for Olentangy School Board
-Cut Taxes
-Curb Spending
-Construct a Better Curriculum

Adam J. White for Olentangy School Board

2011-08-23T20:57:00.002-04:00

From Adam:

I will be hosting a meet and greet this Sunday (8/28/11) at Hoggys on Polaris
from 1 to 3pm for those interested in hearing my views and/or showing support.
Drinks and appetizers will be served.

Adam J. White for Olentangy School Board

-Cut Taxes

-Curb Spending

-Construct a Better Curriculum

The next levy is in the works

2011-06-06T22:17:00.001-04:00

Based on the district's rationale for needing levies, the next one is due in 2012. That's right, we just passed a 7.9 mill levy and the district is bleeding red. Amazing.

Political Doublespeek

2011-05-11T23:48:00.000-04:00

In today's edition of the OVN, Wade-O claims that the district will be doing more with less -- and this after passing a $25 million levy. Doesn't he really mean more with more?

In addition, Feasel states she has her work cut out for her -- and this after identifying only $100,000 in cost reductions. What a way to put a dent in the budget (or is it really a ding, or maybe a scratch, or ...?).

No promise made

2011-05-05T21:42:00.003-04:00

A reader left this comment:

Jim,

To my knowledge, there was never a timeframe stated for how long this levy money is to last before another one is presented to voters. Do you know if this is true?

Also, what are your thoughts regarding district size? How much growth is permitted? Is there a stopping point or does the ogre just keep growing until tax burdens overwhelm the majority and "No" finally wins?

Great question. To my knowledge, no promise was made. So the district can be back in two years with its hand out once more.

Does anyone think the lack of a promise was an oversight?

Until the taxpayers yell, "Enough!" there is no stopping the ogre.

Voting yourself a raise and increased benefits

2011-05-04T22:37:00.005-04:00

Once again, we can assume the levy passed on the vote of district employees and their spouses. And we know the levy was simply about money for raises, benefits, etc. So, in the end, the employees voted themselves a raise and increased benefits. Hmmm.

Note: I know, I know, the levy was about the cuts and the kids. But the cuts were the hammer used to pass the levy. Rein in costs and the levy wasn't needed.

Friendly reminder -- tax effective day was 122 days ago

2011-05-03T22:49:00.007-04:00

During the campaign, Olentangy for Kids made this statement: These additional taxes will not be collected until 2012.

For those of us who escrow our tax payments, we are already four months behind. Remember, taxes are always paid in arrears. But they are effective the first day of the year in which a new levy is passed. That means this new levy is effective January 1, 2011.

Better tighten your belts extra hard today and begin making additional escrow payments. You don't want to face a big escrow catch-up bill early next year.

Note: The sweet irony is that as you tighten, others loosen.

It's OK to vote No

2011-05-03T07:00:00.000-04:00

A reminder on election day!

The district can go back to the ballot in November with a scaled-down issue. -- Jim

OFK spins a response

2011-05-02T20:11:00.003-04:00

In an earlier post, I rhetorically asked, "How do the current heads of OFK spin that little nugget?" Now I know (number 5 below).

Real quick response to the OFK response to my 10 reasons not to vote for the levy:

Intro: Is the bond expert the same district resident (is the expert even a district resident?) who also is the district bond consultant? If so, working the weekend was not just a freebie. I bring this up only because OFK makes the claim.

1. Bond Residuals: Call the money what you want. The interest earned is not an investment (I explain that in a couple of blog posts). The IRS does not allow governmental entities to make an arbitrage profit on tax-free bonds. So the interest is equal (dollar for dollar, for the most part) to the interest current residents have been paying on the bonds. In other words, if the revenue from the bonds earns 5%, the district can only earn 5% on its investment -- there can be no "money mak[ing] money."

2. Search the web for O'Brien's comments as reported in ThisWeekNews. He changed his story with his letter to the editor. Also note that Lucas's responses to my letter to the editor did not refute my claim about O'Brien's comments.

3. The district is using previously-taxed dollars to pay-down the current bond payments, so to speak. How is that forcing future residents to pay their fair share? The older levies actually did what they said.

4. The elementary cost is 32% higher than the last elementary ($10.035 million to $7.8 million). And that is an acceptable increase?

5. Check the current five-year forecast on the district website to see that the district planned to lower the ratio.

6. This response has never made sense. As I read it, if the levy fails, the district will ask for MORE money to offset the proposed cuts in state funding that will drive lower expenditures if the levy passes. Or something like that. The argument sounds good but does not hold up to scrutiny.

Some call it a threat, but it is really a lie

2011-05-02T19:49:00.000-04:00

Olentangy district top news:

* NEW INFORMATION AVAILABLE REGARDING POTENTIAL BUSING CUTS
If the May 3 levy fails, Olentangy will no longer be able to provide the busing services that go above and beyond state requirements. That means that beginning with the 2011-12 school year, there would be no busing for high school students or any student in kindergarten through eighth grade who lives within two miles of his or her school. To assist parents in planning for this possibility, the transportation department has created maps showing the streets that are within two miles of each school and would therefore not receive bus service. Click here to view the maps. (emphasis mine)

Note the phrase "will no longer be able to provide." Now focus on "be able to." Had the district left out those three words, the statement would be a threat. But, in its current form, the statement is a lie.

Why support those who cannot be trusted?

Note: Why do the district and board lie if they have such a good story to tell? That is a valid question to ask Wade, Julie and the rest of the lot.

Reason #7 for not supporting the Olentangy levy

2011-05-01T22:41:00.000-04:00

According to Responsible Olentangy Citizens, Sue Mahler, OFK core member emeritus, acting as district finance chair, "reported [to the school board] that the sooner we get to this number [student/teacher ratio of 15:1), the sooner OLSD can save millions."

Instead, the district is lowering the ratio in each year of the most-recent five-year forecast.

How do the current heads of OFK spin that little nugget?

Note: Why do the folks at OFK simply fall in line with the Wade Lucas / Julie Feasel nonsense?

Reason #6 for not supporting the Olentangy levy

2011-05-01T22:22:00.000-04:00

The bond issue includes -- get this -- $13.5 million for a new elementary school. Given that the last elementary cost only $7.8 million, $5.7 million remain for (I was informed by the district treasurer) technology, loose furnishings and textbooks. That is $8,769 per pupil. Amazing! Amazingly expensive, that is.

Add it up (and I am being charitable here):

use of a computer, network, etc. -- $1,000
a desk and chair - $150
textbooks - $250
misc - $1,000

So, where is the remaining $6,369 per student?

Hint: It's not in your wallet.

Read this entry to see what the district does with excess bond funds -- your money. And remember, the district HAS sufficient bond residuals to build the new elementary.

Olentangy Levy: Feasel's Fictitious Financing

2011-05-01T21:39:00.000-04:00

School board president Feasel claims the district "already cut $15.7 million" since 2008. Interesting. But from where?

Certainly not staffing, since staffing is increasing relative to students. So where were the cuts made? Hold that thought.

I just cut $1 trillion from my family budget. How, you ask? Well, I had assumed that we needed $1 trillion in additional expenses this year. Then I came to my senses and realized I didn't. But a cut is a cut. So I cut $1 trillion. You just gotta love Feasal financing.

The district has cut nothing.

Of, sure, they pared back their inflated five-year forecasts. But that is not cutting, just as my $1 trillion example is not cutting.

So take Feasal and her fictitious financing for what they are: nonsense.

Note: The folks over at OFK know better. But they have a levy to sell. And the truth is the first thing to go in campaign.

Wade-O lies again

2011-04-30T17:37:00.004-04:00

Oh, wait. I am being redundant.

In his reply to me letter in The Dispatch, Wade-O claims that the almost 9% forecasted health care cost increases is due to new staff. Wrong. His own five-year financial forecast has premiums rising by almost 9% annually. In addition, there are costs associated with new employees. So the total is HIGHER than than 9%.

Wade-O amazes me.

Note: Not really.

Wade-O changes his story

2011-04-30T12:33:00.003-04:00

In his response to my letter in The Dispatch, Wade-O drops the zero base salary increase claim he made in his response to my letter in the Delaware Gazette? Why the change? Was it a lie?

Take the Wade-O challenge: Search the Ohio Department of Taxation website for the term "tax effort." You will not find Wade-O's definition of tax effort there. So why does he make that claim and reference the tax department? Another lie?

Wade-O, changing your story doesn't say much for your truthfulness.

Reason #5 the Olentangy levy is not needed

2011-04-29T21:28:00.000-04:00

OFK is lying when it states the following in regard to the supposed no-additional-millage bond component of the levy, "Current residents should see NO increase in their tax rate for school bonds, which results in future residents paying more than they would have under a 'traditional' debt structure."

An internal document obtained through a public records request shows current residents paying the greater portion. Why? The district is using residual funds (which current residents are paying off) to reduce the millage in the early years.

Future residents will pay the same as a "traditional" debt structure. And both the district and OKF know they are lying about this one.

Note: Wade Lucas has pulled a few fast ones in his short tenure in Olentangy. For Feasel, it's as expected. For OFK, dangling from the puppeteer's strings are leading the organization down the wrong path.

Reason #4 why the levy is not needed

2011-04-28T21:53:00.000-04:00

The Ohio Department of Transportaton produces a report for regular education transportation. Sorted by the efficiency ratio statistic, Olentangy's transportation department ranks 303 in transportation efficiency.

Oletangy needs to improves its transportation department and give the efficiencies back to the taxpayers.

Yet another reason not to support the Olentangy Levy

2011-04-27T22:01:00.007-04:00

Wade-O lies.

I had a letter published in the Delaware Gazette -- the very same letter published in The Dispatch yesterday. Turns out Wade and treasurer Jenkins replied ... and lied.

Here is my response, hopefully the Gazette will publish it:

Dear Editor:

There is a difference between obfuscation and lying. In their response to my letter (4-21-11), Olentangy superintendent Wade Lucas and treasure Rebecca Jenkins provide examples of both.

They obfuscate when they imply the Ohio Department of Taxation terms tax effort a simple ranking of districts by school millage equivalents. Here is the department's definition of tax effort: it is the percentage of income in a school district that is paid for residential and agricultural property taxes and school district income taxes.

District residents currently a pay high percentage of their income in the form of school-related taxes. Today, the district ranks in the top 10% statewide based on the department's tax effort calculation. The district has been moving up in rank over the past 10 years, a trend that will continue with the passage of this latest levy.

Lucas and Jenkins obfuscate with regard to bond residuals. According to page 57 of the district's 2010 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (available on both the district and state auditor websites), the district performed "a one time transfer of $12,200,000 to the other Capital Project fund from the Building fund."

Last year, Lucas and Jenkins, in essence, hid $12 million of bond funds and then have the nerve to turn around and claim otherwise.

Lucas and Jenkins lie when they state the five-year financial forecast does not include close to 6% average salary increases. Furthermore, they lie when they claim the forecast provides for "no base wage increase during the first three years."

Page 8 of the district's October five-year financial forecast (available on both the district and Ohio Department of Education websites) shows forecasted pay increases of $1,978,722 in fiscal year 2013, the first year of the new levy. This is a 2% average increase -- not the zero percent Lucas and Jenkins claimed in their response.

Add in the step increase and education advance and the average salary increase is close to 6%. And this continues for all subsequent years of the forecast.

If obfuscation is not a action residents want from their public officials, what about lying?

Reason #3 why the Olentangy Levy is not needed

2011-04-26T21:33:00.000-04:00

O'Brien, the latest addition to the Olentengy school board, has said that the district has "pledged to pursue budget reductions of about $5.5 million during the next three years.

Why is the district waiting UNTIL a levy passes before enacting the O'Brien reductions?

The current issue is overstated by millions. And O'Brien agrees with at least $5 million of that.

Reason #2 for not supporting the levy

2011-04-25T00:01:00.000-04:00

A statistic tauted by the district is the average salary for district teachers. Interesting finding: since fiscal year 2006, the average salary for district teachers has increased at over twice the rate of the average salary for residents -- 18% to 8%.

Twice.

And this does not include the average cost of benefits.

Any wonder why the district school-related property tax burden is soon to be top 20 in the state.

Note: Number used above are from the Ohio Department of Education's Cupp Report.

Reason #1 the Olentangy levy is unneeded

2011-04-24T23:25:00.001-04:00

The district currently has sufficient bond residuals to fund the $24.4 million on the ballot. Where is the money? $12 million of bond residuals was moved into the permanent improvement fund last year. Why was it moved there? I'm not certain. But I know that it is not going to be used for permanent improvements. That's right. An internal district document shows that money being set aside other purposes. Another $5.5 million is sitting in the bond fund, and just like the $12 million in the permanent improvement fund, unspent on previous projects. So, assuming the listed projects and expenses are needed (and should be funded over 27 years), the district has sufficient bond residuals (if they trim just some of the fat, of course).

Why trust OFK? They can't even get their own history straight

2011-04-24T21:47:00.000-04:00

From the Olentangy for Kids website:

Why should you trust Olentangy For Kids? Good question! Before 1999, Olentangy’s levy campaigns were run primarily by school district employees – board members, administrators, etc. That’s still fairly commonplace across Ohio. But there are two problems with that. First, to a community member, that “campaigning” sometimes seemed self-serving. Secondly, because of that vested interest, community members sometimes were suspicious of the facts that were provided by the district’s campaign. Not surprisingly, Olentangy often lost its ballot issues. They made it their business to research and verify all campaign information and to take responsibility to distribute that information to their fellow community members. Since then, nearly 1,000 conscientious and diligent community members step up to research and prepare campaign information and to distribute it to their neighbors. We do our best to validate and verify. We’re your neighbors who care so much about our kids’ future and our community’s future that we get involved – investing our time, energy, and expertise.

Oh, where to begin?

No group of concerned citizens ever "stepped up and took the campaign reins away from the district." Never happened. And I should know, as I served as OFK co-chair in 1998 and 1999. The issue prior to 1999 was organizational -- it was not an issue of district control. (Homework: Find the newspaper articles from 1998 where I lambasted the board for doing nothing during the 1998 levy campaign.)

That said, district officials participated in OFK before 1999, just as they participated in the 1999 levy and are participating in this year's levy. (Homework: Ask OFK to list the members of its strategy committee since 1999 and count how many years superintendents and communication directors served.)

Despite the claim, the "vested interest" still exists. (Homework: Ask the Delaware County Board of Elections for the OFK finance reports for the past 10 years and see who contributes to the committee -- compare community contributions with those from district employees and vendors.)

Research is only as good as those researching. During the 1999 campaign, I personally researched and answered every email sent to the committee. And my answers were not cut-n-pastes from documents provided by the district's communication department. There were a few other strong members on the early committees, but they are long gone. (Homework: Ask any of the "1,000 conscientious and diligent community members" to explain bond funding to see how well-researched the volunteers really are.)

So, why should you trust OFK? You shouldn't. Trust them only as far as you trust the district officials -- because it is district officials guiding the strategy committee, regardless of who the figure head chair is these days.

The OFK of today simply repeats what the district spoon-feeds it.

Statistics as a blunt instrument

2011-04-21T00:01:00.000-04:00

The folks over at Olentangy for Kids are trying to use statistics to prove that property values are directly linked to the local school district. But their statistics are blunt and their conclusions dull -- but their conclusions tell the story they want told ... just like that old saying, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Here is their analysis: Scioto Reserve – In the Scioto Reserve subdivision, some of the homes are part of Olentangy, while others are part of Buckeye Valley. Here is a comparison of home sales in 2010 within that subdivision:

Interestingly, I analyzed this very same question five years ago. So I figured I would analyze it once again.

To get the data (I have no idea which hat OFK pulled their data from), I went to the county auditor's site and pulled recent sales figures (from January 2010 to present) for houses (not condos) in Scioto Reserve. I then had to filter out new construction (new construction sales have not been tested by the market) as well as any sale that is not considered an arms-length sale (there is a column on the auditor's sales report that shows valid sales). This is my data.

I then ran some statistical models (you can download a demo version of my favorite tool, NLREG, from NLREG.com) in order to see what the data says (if anything).

It turns out that there is little difference between sale prices in Scioto Reserve based on the district alone. In fact, no one should make any claim whatsoever regarding the effect of the district on property value (based on Scioto Reserve as the sample). None whatsoever.

This is the same conclusion I reached when I previously analyzed Olentangy and Buckey Valley, as well as Olentangy and Big Walnut.

But I am certain that OFK will continue using the dull conclusions of their blunt statistics.

Reason #10 for not supporting the levy

2011-04-20T00:01:00.000-04:00

The district can come back in November with a scaled-down levy. Simple as that!

Phantom Committee Strikes Again

2011-04-19T22:07:00.004-04:00

How does a committee that hasn't met in seven months issue media releases? How has it "made it easy for you to make your voice heard?"

This is the product of a district running a pseudo levy campaign by making stuff up right and left.

A CALL TO ACTION!
from Olentangy's School Funding Action Committee

Help the School Funding Action Committee fight the proposed state budget cuts for our schools!

The proposed budget will be hard on many school districts, but its impact on Olentangy is unparalleled due to our continued growth. Our district lost nearly $13 million in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010/2011 and will lose an additional $9 million in anticipated state revenue in FY 2012/2013 due to the previous governor's change to the Evidenced Based Funding Model. The newly proposed budget would cost the district an additional $3.3 million (44% more) of basic funding in FY 2012. In addition, the acceleration of the phase out of the Tangible Personal Property Tax reimbursement is going to force the district to make $11 million of additional cuts through FY 2014.

The School Funding Action Committee has made it easy for you to make your voice heard. Just click here to access the instructions for sending lawmakers a pre-written letter or your own thoughts on the issue.

Thank you for taking the time to help keep Olentangy a great place to live and learn!

Reason #9 why the levy is not needed

2011-04-18T21:39:00.003-04:00

Taxpayers are picking up the pickup and the pickup of the pickup -- and the pick up medicare.

For state retirement, the school district and the employee contribute to the employee's retirement -- unless the employee works for Olentangy, of course.

In Olentangy, the district -- which means the taxpayers -- "picks up" the employee contribution. In addition, since the district picked up the employee's contribution, that amount is considered income and subject to retirement contributions, from both the district and employee. The district -- taxpayers, once again -- "picks up" the employee contribution on the original "pickup," the pickup on the pickup.

So administrator income is actually 11% higher than advertised.

Make sense?

It doesn't have to. But you pay for it anyway.

Yards signs available

2011-04-17T20:47:00.001-04:00

If you are looking for a Vote No sign, leave your name, address and phone number in a comment (will not be published) and someone will leave a sign in your yard. -- Jim

Reason #8 for not supporting the levy

2011-04-15T23:18:00.001-04:00

Olentangy for Kids loves to flaunt this graph -- it's the lead banner of the OFK dog and pony show:

Add 7.9 mills to Olentangy and the district is the only behind Bexley as far as school taxes.

Ten years ago, the district was one of the lowest taxed in the area. Now it is heading for second place.

Note: Ironically, the graph is under the heading, "My taxes seem high. Why is that?" Ok. Let me take that bait. Could the reason your taxes seem high be because they are high? Hmmm.

Olentangy for Kids and the law

2011-04-07T22:01:00.000-04:00

This all seems like yesterday. OK, it all seems like last levy.

You remember, the bogus opinion from 2008 regarding the district's (supposed) ability to close schools to the public should the levy fail. Now it's a bogus opinion claiming that OFK does not have to pay for the use of school facilities, despite this opinion being in conflict with state law, board policy, and the opinion of the state attorney general.

District treasurer Rebecca (Becky) Jenkins has been nice enough and responsive. But she is not the responsible party here, that lies elsewhere.

Regardless, the district's tax consuming legal council is once again providing opinions that suit the needs of the district. According to an email from Jenkins, "He (legal council) basically said the Board is not required to charge OFK for facility use."

Not required? In violation of state law, board policy, and the opinion of the state attorney general?

I think I'll request a copy of the legal council's bill for his opinion -- it always nice to quantify the value of our tax dollars at work.

Here is my latest email to Jenkins:

Becky,

Per Kevin McIver chief of the opinions section of the office of the state attorney general, opinion 91-064 still stands and OFK must pay reasonable fees. I assume that you value an AG opinion over the verbal opinion of your legal council. Let me know whether the district intends to comply with state law.

In addition, according to board policy, for OFK to use district facilities, "[a] facility use agreement must be executed and approved prior to its use by any nonschool Board sponsored group."

I request that you provide me the use agreement that is currently in effect.

Also, let me know which fee group listed in the board policy includes OFK.

Thanks.

Jim

I wonder if the OFK volunteers know what nonsense goes in on order to pass a levy. Is anything beyond the pale?

OFK volunteers: When you face your neighbor, remember the actions of your committee reflect on you.

Note: Here is the relevant section of the Ohio Revised Code. It is unambiguous -- unless, just maybe, your dance is for the tax dollar.

3313.77 Use of schoolhouses and grounds for public meetings and entertainments.
The board of education of any city, exempted village, or local school district shall, upon request and the payment of a reasonable fee, subject to such regulation as is adopted by such board, permit the use of any schoolhouse and rooms therein and the grounds and other property under its control, when not in actual use for school purposes, for any of the following purposes:

(A) Giving instructions in any branch of education, learning, or the arts;

(B) Holding educational, religious, civic, social, or recreational meetings and entertainments, and for such other purposes as promote the welfare of the community; provided such meetings and entertainments shall be nonexclusive and open to the general public;

(C) Public library purposes, as a station for a public library, or as reading rooms;

(D) Polling places, for holding elections and for the registration of voters, or for holding grange or similar meetings. Within sixty days after the effective date of this section, the board of education of each school district shall adopt a policy for the use of school facilities by the public, including a list of all fees to be paid for the use of such facilities and the costs used to determine such fees. Once adopted, the policy shall remain in effect until formally amended by the board. A copy of the policy shall be made available to any resident of the district upon request.

Effective Date: 08-29-1975

Olentangy for Kids: time for a math check

2011-04-06T22:38:00.004-04:00

Olentangy for Kids loves to flaunt this graph -- it's the lead banner of the OFK dog and pony show:

Olentangy School District: taxpayers looking for the truth

2011-04-05T19:16:00.004-04:00

The Buckeye Institute has a database of the salaries of all public school employees (the Institute has other searchable public employee databases, as well). According to its latest email, these are the top searches for March by district:

Teacher Salary
1. Gahanna-Jefferson City (4,570)
2. Columbus City (3,549)
3. Olentangy Local (3,342)
4. Cleveland Metropolitan (3,323)
5. Akron City (3,113)

Get the feeling that Olentangy would rather not be number 3 on this list (the district was number 3 inFebruary, as well)? Wonder why so many people are concerned about district salaries? Hmmm. Note: The database is not complete, but it is a start. It does not list the value is all benefits, such as the pickup, the pickup on the pickup, etc.

Yard signs

2011-04-05T07:51:00.003-04:00

If you are looking for a Vote No sign, leave your name, address and phone number in a comment (will not be published) and someone will leave a sign in your yard. -- Jim

Olentangy for Kids: roots planted firmly in the central office

2011-04-03T21:39:00.003-04:00

OFK is grassroots? Relies on community support? Hmmm.

Some of the roots of OFK are planted firmly in the district's central office. Other roots are still pulling nutrients from some real blasts-from-the-past (Hint: Go to the OFK Twitter page to see who OFK follows -- the first letters of one begins with Avak, another Joel.)

From the OFK website:

Olentangy for Kids is a grassroots group of Olentangy residents dedicated to educating the community about the upcoming levy. Our goal is to provide the voters of Olentangy with the facts surrounding the upcoming ballot issue so that they can make an informed decision at the polls.

Olentangy for Kids is completely funded by private donations and relies on community support through our network of volunteers.

Olentangy for Children

2011-04-02T17:07:00.004-04:00

Oh, no! More competition. First it was Responsible Olentangy Citizen, now it's Olentangy for Children. Check out OFC on Facebook. Hey, this kind of competition is good.

Wade Lucas: Manipulating the Masses

2011-04-01T21:04:00.000-04:00

Another repost about Wade-O -- Jim

Regardless of their value, Hilliard and Worthington have community-run websites that question their respective school districts. These are sites organized and run by folks in the community. And they go by these names: educatehilliard.org and educateworthington.org. Again, regardless of their value, these are community-run sites.

Now, venture over to educateolentangy.org. Wade-O and his propagandist over at the Olentangy School District recently bought their domain in order to play Olentangy residents. In other words, taxpayers are once again being played with their very own, hard-earned tax dollars.

Has Olentangy no shame?

The Wade Lucas Gambit

2011-03-31T18:53:00.000-04:00

A repost so you can see what Wade-O is all about -- Jim

You know the story: Good ol' Wade -- the selfless educator and public servant -- just wants to help the kids, so he accepts the offer from the Olentangy board of education. Since Wade can be trusted, there is no need to agree to a contract at the time of offer. We are all family here. Right?

Everthing goes swimmingly until its time to agree to the specifics: the dollars -- salary and benefits. Then, old Wade loses the facade of altruism and goes for the big bucks. Hey, he has the board backed into a corner since the board already announced his imminent arrival, and he knows it. Sure, the super majority of the board is a bunch of hacks, but is that reason enough to beat up the taxpayer?

So, the Olentangy taxpayers gets Wade as the new superintendent -- a public servant who is out for himself. He out-maneuvered the board and now the community has to pay his outrageous salary. And, when he retires, the taxpayers of Ohio are on the hook for over $200K per year. Think about that, Wade is going to retire with a tax-funded income of close to one-quarter million dollars per year.

I guess the selfless public servants in education need to be insulated from our current financial crisis -- they are only about the kids, you know.

All about the kids? Nope. It's all about Wade. He outplayed the board and nailed the taxpayer. And he hasn't even started working yet. Here we go again.

Note: The board is voting on his contract today at 5:30. Go and give Wade a big hello for the taxpayers who are paying, and paying, and paying ...

Olentangy Levy: Where's the support?

2011-03-30T22:36:00.000-04:00

Last fall, the district commissioned a survey with your tax dollars. What was stated loud and clear is the residents are not supportive of an unneeded levy. Only 36.8% of those surveyed were supportive of a 7.9 mill operating levy and no-additional mills bond levy.

And that support fell when the cost was conveyed to those being surveyed. Even after being made aware of the threatened cuts, 58.5% stated they were less likely to support the issues once the $242 per $100,000 accessed valuation was stated.

First Powell taxpayers defeated their income tax issue. Now it is time for the district taxpayers to stand up against out-of-control district spending.

Notes:

1. The survey is public record. If you want a copy, request it from the district treasurer.

The Baird Preliminary Financing Plan

2011-03-25T21:00:00.004-04:00

Here's the document from Baird detailing what I have been posting:

Funding the bond with dollars taxed years ago

2011-03-24T22:40:00.012-04:00

First, a point to consider: The debt fund is the fund that is evaluated by bond rating agencies. During the last levy campaign, the district claimed that rating agencies look at the general fund. Not true. They do look at the debt fund to make certain that the district has sufficient tax revenue in the current year for maturing bonds and interest. The concern is that an increase of taxpayers in default would leave the district with insufficient funds to make required payments. So the district needs to carry some balance. Some balance. Not $27 million.

What of the $12.2 million transfer from the building fund to the permanent improvement fund? Well it's moving into the debt fund -- according to the "2011 Preliminary Financing Plan" prepared by Baird -- in order to allow the district to claim that it is benefiting current taxpayers over future taxpayers..

This is all esoteric financing. Let's take a look at what is being advertised.

Olentangy for Kids makes this claim in response to its FAQ "How does a "no additional mill" bond levy work?"

This bond issue will be listed on the ballot as being for .50 mills. However, due to rapid growth, it will be collected at no additional mills.

This plan addresses growth while keeping our tax rates low. Current residents should see NO increase in their tax rate for school bonds, which results in future residents paying more than they would have under a “traditional” debt structure.

Structuring the bond debt in this fiscally responsible manner creates a situation in which future residents pay more of their fair share. Those already living in the district will see a much lower millage than they would have under traditional debt funding.

First off, relative rapid growth is history. Yes, the district is growing, but not at the same percentage as years past.

So the district is now unable to structure the upcoming issue in order to meet this claim -- the claim is a lie.

The district is using your tax dollars -- taxes you overpaid in previous years -- to offset what would have been in increase in bond mills.

Think of it this way: Last year the district taxed you at 10 mills. This year they only needed 9 mills but taxed you at the same 10 mills. Next year (should the levy pass) they will need 11 mills but will only tax you at 10, and they will offset the 11th mill with the mill you overpaid this year.

Debt isn't being pushed into the future so that incoming resident pay more. There is no "fair share" to be paid by new residents. You have already paid for a benefit that will be reaped by new residents. If you believe otherwise, you have been snookered by the board and administration.

So here is what the district plans to do: It will begin setting itself up for future levy (say 2014) that will increase your taxes. You will overpay -- pay more than what is required -- and the district will bank that money and then claim that it will run a "no additional mills" levy for the subsequent issue. But you will have already paid the additional mills.

You have overpaid the district $27 million dollars (almost a year's worth of total bond payments). And now it claims that it is going to keep your taxes flat -- as if it is doing you a favor.

The $12.2 million fund transfer is part of the ruse to bolster a claim that is nothing short of a lie.

Amazing.

Note: The report from Baird shows that a traditional levy would have averaged 5.91 mill to be paid. The "no additional mills" structure reduces the millage to an average of 5.87 mills. So the distict will save the taxpayer an average of .04 mills? Nope. In order to save us an average of .04 mills, we had to have already overpaid the district some $14 million dollars.

-- end series --

The nonsense of "No Additional Mills"

2011-03-22T22:51:00.007-04:00

Next we need to discuss how "no additional mills" levies fit into all of this.

When I was on the board, before Olentangy placed its first and only "no additional tax" levy on the ballot, I met with the then-treasurer of a nearby district. This treasurer may have created the first instance of a "no additional tax" levy in Ohio -- a "no additional tax" levy is more strict, so to speak, than a "no additional mills" levy. So he was very informative.

Here's what he explained: When a district wants to run "no additional mills" levies, it must never let it's bond millage rate drop. Never. That is true even if the district does not need the additional revenue to pay back the maturing bonds.

Why? Because if the millage drops, then the district will have to ask for additional mills on the next ballot.

Think of if this way: If the millage required to pay currently maturing bonds dropped below 8.72 mills (say to 7.72 mills), then the district couldn't have claimed it was structuring this next bond issue as "no additional mills." It would have had to say that it was asking for an additional mill. So your taxes did not go down -- you overpaid -- just so that the district could make a nonsense claim.

The district overtaxes residents in order to claim that it is saving taxpayers money. Did you get that?

But it's not saving money. It is taking dollars from your wallet and sitting on them, only to turn around and pretend that it was all for your benefit.

Thanks a lot.

This is another reason why the district is sitting on a year's worth of bond-related tax dollars.

First we learned about the interest benefit. Now we have learned about the slick selling pitch.

With this background, tomorrow we can address the movement of $12.2 million from the building fund to the permanent improvement fund.

-- end part 2 --

I knew it would happen ...

2011-03-21T21:46:00.008-04:00

A reader wanted to better understand the reason the district moved $12.2 million from the building fund to the permanent improvement fund. It's a complicated explanation, but it is spring break, so let's get technical for a couple of days.

Bonds 101

The district has a number of funds. For this series, we are only concerned with four funds: general, building, debt, and permanent. The general fund is for general operating expenses. The building fund is where the proceeds from the sale of bonds are initially deposited. The debt fund is where tax revenue to pay the maturing bonds is deposited. The permanent improvement fund is used for various capital expenditures (in general, improvements that have a life of five years or more).

Once a bond levy is approved by the voters, the district is authorized to sell bonds not to exceed the amount or length designated on the ballot. The district is not required to sell the bonds in the amount listed on the ballot, it can sell less. Though the authorization to sell, if unused, expires after five years.

The district does not have to sell all authorized bonds at once. And it can select various maturity dates. In essence, the district creates its own payment plan.

Let's assume the district passed a $1 million levy to build a new bus depot. The issue was advertised to be for a bus depot, but the ballot language authorizes the district to spend the $1 million on just about anything (read the actual ballot language before voting). So the district could sell the bonds and use the funds to renovate some administrative suites.

The bonds are packaged and sold and the proceeds deposited into the building fund. The next tax year, the district can choose (within bounds, of course) the mills to be collected the following year. The mills are collected and deposited into the debt fund.

I'll play nice and have the district build its bus depot. The payments are likely staggered, maybe over two years (depending on the build time). The unused money in the bond fund does not sit idle. It is invested and earns an interest return.

Since school bonds are tax-exempt, they are subject to IRS arbitration rules. Arbitration stops issuers of tax-exempt bonds from a earning profit from the spread between the interest on the bonds and the interest earned on investments. For the most part (with a few exceptions), any interest "profit" is "taxed" by the feds.

That said, the district pays no interest -- the taxpayers do. So, even though the district cannot earn a nominal profit, it can and does earn a real profit since it receives interest from the invested bonds proceeds while the taxpayers pay the interest on the bonds.

All interest earned from bonds is deposited in the general fund. This means that taxpayers are funding operating expenses with 27-year (for the most part) loans. Hmmm.

The district can overtax -- ask for more mills and hence more revenue than it needs to pay the bonds that are maturing. Again, money does not sit idle in the debt fund, it is invested and earns the district an interest return. Arbitration is not an issue here.

So it benefits the district over the taxpayer to sell more bonds than needed and tax more than is required.

It's no wonder that the district has close to $27 million over the various funds (including, since last year, the permanent improvement fund -- more to follow) more than it needs.

And it's no wonder that the district does its very best to hide those funds from their true owners -- the taxpayers.

--end part 1--

Reason #1 the Olentangy levy is unneeded

2011-03-20T22:17:00.006-04:00

OFK

2011-03-19T23:22:00.000-04:00

OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,
OFK, OFK, OFK, OFK, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy for Kids, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, Olentangy levy, 2011, 2011, 2011, 2011, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district, Olentangy School district,

Olentangy for Kids: Are they breaking the law?

2011-03-17T00:01:00.001-04:00

State law permits a political action committee (such as Olentangy for Kids) to use school facilities as long the PAC pays a reasonable fee and allows the meetings to be open to the public.

Has OFK been using district facilities without paying?

According the the district treasurer, there is no record of any such payment to the district.

The story is developing.

Note: OFK volunteers, I hope you hold your organization to the letter of the law.

We are all posthuman

2011-03-16T22:10:00.003-04:00

It's been a while since I last posted an excerpt from the magazine for teachers of teachers, Teachers College Record, published by the folks at the Teachers College of Columbia University.

From Education Out of Bounds: Reimagining Cultural Studies for a Posthuman Age:

"Exopedagogy therefore is both the means and end to a particular posthumanist vocation irreducible to professional occupation but taking over the whole space located out of bounds yet permeated with a new vision of untimely love together with the new image of thought and posthumanist education." (emphasis in original)

By the way, what's the probability that the above grouping of words -- the concluding sentence of the article -- holds any operational meaning?

Hint: Zero.

You knew it was coming

2011-03-16T21:01:00.002-04:00

The Ohio School Board Association is claiming drastic district financial losses since the one-time inflow of federal stimulus money is not being replaced. Not being replaced? It was a one-time inflow of federal dollars (printed paper that is driving our current inflation, but I digress). One-time. It was never going to be replaced.

Instead of using the money to assist with the pain resulting from the realities of a downturned economy, Ohio's school districts (Olentangy included) spent the money as if the bubble never burst.

Well, it's time to burst the bubble of the unrealists who run school districts.

Folks, the money is no longer here (in our wallets), so it can't be there (in your budgets). Make your adjustments -- just like we all made adjustments -- and get on with life.

The (il)logic of Dave King

2011-03-15T22:12:00.008-04:00

Dave King, Olentangy board member, has always been the Ringo to Feasel's Yoko and Galloway's John. King has never had much to say. And now I know why.

In his letter to the editor in today's Dispatch, King shows little grasp of elementary logic. Elementary illogic? Maybe.

The non sequitur:

King, in his own words, "We all gain by safe neighborhoods, engaged and successful families and businesses, an attractive workforce, higher property values and broader opportunities."

So how do my school district property tax dollars lead to an attractive workforce? Do my dollars fund cosmetology, skin care, clothing, etc? Hmmm.

OK, cheap shot. But fun nonetheless.

King makes a leap in logic when he attributes the above characteristics to a school district. Does the school district really cause families to be engaged and successful? Or is he just being circular and wanting to state the opposite causation? Or does he even know?

Petitio principii

King, again in his own words, "Our administration has successfully demonstrated that we must have an effective balance between the educational opportunities that we enjoy with the attendant cost."

Can you spot the logical fallacy here? Hint: It's called begging the question.

Our administration has demonstrated what? How?

The administration may have argued for something called balance. But they have never demonstrated it.

We are in debt to you

Finally, there is this comment, "Our community accrues the benefits of a highly regarded school district and its graduates."

Our community and our children accrue only the district's debt, which stands at $390 million, give or take.

This may all explain why King has a "strong trust in the value of education as both immediate and longterm." Immediate and longterm what?

I think King's adjectives were looking to qualify these two nouns: taxes and debt.

But we knew that already.

$8,769 per student in technology, loose furnishings, and textbooks

2011-03-14T00:01:00.001-04:00

That's right. The bond issue includes -- get this -- $13.5 million for a new elementary school. Given that the last elementary cost only $7.8 million, $5.7 million remain for (I was informed by the district treasurer) technology, loose furnishings and textbooks. That is $8,769 per pupil. Amazing! Amazingly expensive, that is.

Add it up (and I am being charitable here):

use of a computer, network, etc. -- $1,000
a desk and chair - $150
textbooks - $250
misc - $1,000

So, where is the remaining $6,369 per student?

Hint: It's not in your wallet.

Read this entry to see what the district does with excess bond funds -- your money. And remember, the district HAS sufficient bond residuals to build the new elementary.

Olentangy for Kids: more nonsense

2011-03-13T00:01:00.005-05:00

According to OFK: •Money raised through the issuance of bonds can only be used for the building of new buildings, remodeling of existing buildings, purchase of land for future buildings or purchase of new equipment (like buses and textbooks). The money cannot be used for operating expenses, which include staff salaries, utilities and everyday expenses.

According to an entry from a district report of bond expenditures obtained through a public records request: "PO: 2608969 ITM: 0002 05/15/2006 Des: REPAINT TOILET PARTITIONS AND Vendor: 006771 - A.K.PAINTING COMPLETELY PAID"

Isn't painting a toilet partition an everyday expense?

To be certain, there is many more instances where 27-year bonds are used to fund operating expenses.

This means your children will still be paying for this repainting decades from now -- a repainting that will not last a year.

Government debt spending gone mad.

The district will continue to get away with this nonsense as long as the taxpayers support unneeded levies.

Note to OFK volunteers: You are selling nonsense to your neighbors. Is that what you want to be doing?

Olentangy School District

2011-03-12T22:24:00.000-05:00

Your tax dollars used against you

2011-03-11T23:53:00.004-05:00

School districts in Ohio fund the operations of the Ohio School Boards Associations (OSBA). OSBA then turns around and lobbies the state to directly benefit district administrators. This is to be expected since OSBA is run, for the most part, by retired school administrators.

The latest OSBA email reads:

Additionally, after careful review of SB 5, we believe one specific provision would have unintended consequences. The bill would eliminate the authority for school boards to pay the "employee share" of contributions to the school employee and teacher retirement systems. Often, this practice applies only to district administrators. Like adjustments in salaries, school boards have used this tool to mange the overall compensation and benefits package for employees.

This provision could cause changes in compensation that disproportionately affect some employees, but not others. We have asked for this provision to be removed, allowing boards the flexibility to address the issue locally, but requiring the appropriate transparency practices described in other parts of the bill.

In other words, school administrators are using your tax dollars to have OSBA lobby to keep the pickup, and the pickup on the pickup.

The real nonsense is the comment about "appropriate transparency." The whole point of the pickups is to hide compensation from the public.

Have these people no shame?

Note: The OSBA contribution is not listed on the cut plan. No kidding.

Scooped by the ROC: the challenge is on

2011-03-10T00:01:00.003-05:00

It appears I still live in the halcyon days of relatively low taxes and reasonable district spending. And so I missed this little nugget found by Responsible Olentangy Citizens: the district -- read taxpayers -- also pickups the administrators' medicare contribution. Wow.

The Anti-Positivist stands corrected. The nonsense just gets worse and worse.

Thanks ROC!

And the challenge is on! The challenge to dispell the need for a new levy.

Note: Remember, even the pickup mentioned above is for the kids -- its all for the kids. At least that is the party line. Soon I will return to how Wade-O's contract is all about the kids.

The $12 Million Bond Slush Fund

2011-03-09T20:08:00.007-05:00

The district claims it needs a $24.4 million bond levy, yet ... there is always a yet in Olentangy.

Last year, the district transferred $12 million from its building fund (you know, the fund that is supposed to be used for the projects listed on the ballots) into its permanent improvement fund. Why? So that the district can claim that it needs additional bond revenue while it squirrels away residual revenue from past issues.

This is criminal -- Wade-O and Feasel sure have some nerve.

Neither previous ballot issues nor campaign literature ever mentioned that dollars left over from building projects would end up in another fund. Yet that is what happened.

So now the district can use bond revenue to fund expenditures that should come out of the operating fund. In other words, the taxpayer is on the hook for 27 years for a paint job that will last three -- maybe three -- years.

Such nonsense.

Keep this in mind when you consider why an elementary school now costs $13.5 million dollars. The reason? The district inflates building costs -- backed by the yes-folks on the Development Committee -- so that it can spend the residuals on operating expenses.

If you vote NO, rest assured that the district HAS sufficient funds to build an elementary school. But only if district officials will dip into their $12 million bond slush fund.

Notes:

1. OFK folks, you endorse this nonsense with your name. You cannot separate the actions of the district from your campaign. The mud sticks much too well.
2. To see the nonsense in action, go to the state auditor's site and download Olentangy's FY10 audit.

olentangy for kids

2011-03-08T18:16:00.000-05:00

Taxpayers picking up the pickup's pickup

2011-03-08T18:08:00.007-05:00

A reader asked about the "pickup" clause in administrator contracts. Good question.

For state retirement, the school district and the employee contribute to the employee's retirement -- unless the employee works for Olentangy, of course.

In Olentangy, the district -- which means the taxpayers -- "picks up" the employee contribution. In addition, since the district picked up the employee's contribution, that amount is considered income and subject to retirement contributions, from both the district and employee. The district -- taxpayers, once again -- "picks up" the employee contribution on the original "pickup," the pickup on the pickup.

So administrator income is actually 11% higher than advertised.

Make sense?

It doesn't have to. But you pay for it anyway.

Concerns in the Buckeye State

2011-03-07T23:42:00.003-05:00

Teacher Salary

1. Brecksville-Broadview Heights City (3,594)
2. Columbus City (3,394)
3. Olentangy Local (3,156)
4. Dublin City (2,369)
5. Hilliard City (2,293)

Get the feeling that Olentangy would rather not be number 3 on this list? Wonder why so many people are concerned about district salaries? Hmmm.

Note: The database is not complete, but it is a start. It does not list the value is all benefits, such as the pickup, the pickup on the pickup, etc.

A nugget from Responsible Olentangy Citizens

2011-03-06T21:59:00.006-05:00

Olentangy for Kids as readers

2011-03-05T23:00:00.005-05:00

My favorite comments (unpublished) are those from folks who say something along the lines of, "You never post negative comments."

Guess what? That's right.

The folks over at OFK have their own website and tens of thousands in cash (much of that coming from businesses that directly benefit from district contracts). And I wouldn't surprised if OFK spends over $50,000 of its ill-gotten money on this campaign.

On top of that, the district runs its own media machine (using our tax dollars, of course) to spin half truths and nonsense. Remember these quotes:

Carole Dorn-Bell (then Olentangy communications director): "I must have cut list."

Joel Gagne (Avakian and Associates, a consultant to Olentangy and New Albany): "The time for some political pain is way overdue in [New Albany]."

Paul Fallon (Fallon Research, a consultant of Olentangy and New Albany): "Candidly, I also think you should attempt to cull some private campaign fund dollars to have the ability to test questions in the survey that you do not want to be subjected to the Sunshine Law, because they are publicly-funded."

When they open their sites to folks (like me) who question district spending, then I'll let the OFK foot soldiers comment on my site.

Fair enough?

Statistics as a blunt instrument

2011-03-01T23:15:00.008-05:00

Olentangy Levy and Tax Effort

2011-02-24T23:59:00.004-05:00

According to the calculation used by the Ohio Department of Taxation, Olentangy is ranked 67th out of the state's 600+ districts on tax effort (Tax effort is defined as the percentage of personal income tax goes to pay school-related taxes).

If the levy passes, all things equal, we move into the top 20 statewide. Top 20. Top 3% statewide.

Low taxes used to be the selling point for Olentangy levies. That sales pitch is years long gone.

RESPONSIBLE OLENTANGY CITIZENS

2011-02-20T23:46:00.003-05:00

Uh, oh. I have competition out there. Good. Nothing like a little friendly competition to bring out the best. And RESPONSIBLE OLENTANGY CITIZENS seems like it's headed on the right direction. Stop over and take a look.

Question from reader

2011-02-20T14:58:00.005-05:00

Please explain where you get your data that this is the student:teacher ratio. My kids have never been in a class that small in Olentangy through elementary, MS or HS, though I am sure the occasional AP class is that low, or perhaps a special education class. Are you factoring in special education ratios, which must be lower to meet kids' needs? Or are you strictly looking at regular ed. classrooms. I would like to see where that data is coming from and make sure it isn't "spin" that makes those ratios seem so low. In fact, it seems that classes are going the opposite way over the last few years rather getting smaller, but that is just based on my own kids' classes.

Again, if you could please show where you get your info from, I would appreciate it.

First, and most important, I get my information from either the district website, ODE, or other such source.

To your point, student/teacher ratio is detailed in the district's Five-Year Financial Forecast, found under the treasurer's page on the district website (also available on the ODE site).

Second, please do not confuse class size with student/teacher ratio. They are different. But they are connected.

Think of it this way: a school has 100 students and 10 teachers. The student/teacher ration is 10-t0-1. But if the teacher is in a classroom only 1/2 of the periods in a day, the average class size would be 20-to-1.

Take some time to read the current negotiated agreement (found on the district website) and see the restrictions on the number of classes a teacher CAN teach. Then ask the district treasurer for a list of the number of classes each teacher actually teaches per day.

In essence, this new levy is about paying teachers to NOT teach.

Thanks for the question.

Student/Teacher Ratio and Reality

2011-02-19T22:14:00.003-05:00

I just got back from a college visit to a top-ranked conservative school. An interesting statistic was the student/faculty ratio of 16-to-1. Keep in mind Olentangy's student/staff ratio is moving into mid 14's. That alone is a major driver of expense. And a big reason for continuing levy requests.

Should taxpayers be forced to pay for a ratio that is below a top college -- forced to pay for the amount of time that a teacher gets to spend doing something other than teaching?

The halcyon days are past. It's time that we face the reality of ... say ... 2000 (when the Olentangy ratio was around 16-to-1). That's right. If we return to the staffing ratios that existed before the bubble convinced us that we were richer than we now know we are, our tax dollars could remain in our own pockets ... and ... get this ... the students will experience no real difference.

Olentangy Levy

2011-02-16T22:56:00.003-05:00

A resident asked for my thoughts on the upcoming levy. Here they are:

The key is the district’s Five-Year Financial Forecast (available on the district website). The costs projected for the next four years assume average annual salary increases of close to 6%. Keep in mind that the salary scale is comprised of three components; negotiated increase, step increase, and education increase. The district only likes to report its negotiated increase since that is always a lower number than all three together. Though all three numbers are reported in the forecast for you to read.

In addition, the forecast assumes that the staff contribution percentage for their healthcare will not increase.

So the proposed cuts hit everything except staff salary and benefits, which are projected to increase at a rate that is double what the private sector can expect.

The ratio of students to teacher continues to decline (you can see references to that in the current forecast, but you have to get prior year forecasts to see what that ratio used to be).This decline results in a great increase in costs. A slight increase in this ratio ( say .5 students per teacher) would save a large amount of money, without any impact to students.

The state is in the process of correcting an $8 billion budget hole. There will be big changes to the state school funding system that will not be known until after the levy (the state budget will likely not be signed until close to the June 30 deadline).

A levy in November has the same revenue impact as a levy in May, since taxes are collected in arrears (all new taxes passed in 2011 are collected in 2012). The district could implement additional cost savings for next year (by bringing salaries and benefits in line with the private sector, and slightly increasing the student/teacher ratio to where it was just a few years ago), wait until the state budget is passed, and consider a November levy (I don’t think that is needed either).

The district is not being honest when it states that it must enact cuts. That is simply not true. Given its current forecast, all the district needs to state is that it plans to pass a levy on or before the spring election of 2012. In the spring of 2012, the district would need to have a cut plan (assuming it did not implement any cost savings – salaries, benefits, etc.) in place since contracts are dependent on sufficient resources for school year 2013 (starting July 1, 2012).

But a cut plan, and a threat to enact those cuts, are not required. When I served, we never made such threats. The cuts were proposed only when needed.

Jim

Olentangy for Kids

2011-02-06T22:33:00.000-05:00

The Big Olentangy Levy Lie (one of them, anyway)

2011-01-29T13:07:00.006-05:00

Over at Olentangy for Kids, the folks are at it once again, stating the incomplete nonsense fed to them by the district officials. Note this statement: These additional taxes will not be collected until 2012.

For those of us who escrow our tax payments, we had better be making extra escrow payments now -- with the taxes being collected by your mortgage company today. Otherwise, should this expensive, unneeded levy pass, we will receive a big escrow catch-up bill early next year.

Remember, taxes are always in arrears. But they are effective the first of the year a new levy is passed. That is January 2011, not January 2012, as implied by the Olentangy for Administrators and Unions -- er, Olentangy for Kids.

Vile political doublespeek

2011-01-27T22:57:00.004-05:00

A boy is sexually assaulted in a Hilltop library and the library spokeswoman had this to say, "The library is truly a safe place."

Truly a safe place? Can she be serious?

Note: Bad things can happen anywhere. But do you claim the site of the crime "is truly a safe place?" Well, if you work for government, you do. So much for the myths that government keeps folks safe and tells the truth.

Kevin O'Brien boards the absurd train

2011-01-27T22:52:00.005-05:00

O'Brien, the latest addition to the Olentengy school board, says he now favors a 7.9 mill levy since the district has "pledged to pursue budget reductions of about $5.5 million during the next three years."

So O'Brien is stating he wants more tax dollars from residents since the district has agreed that it doesn't need as much as it's asking for.

Hmmm.

O'Brien, welcome aboard the absurd train. Keep this up and you will be the next board president.

Unprincipled votes

2011-01-19T22:08:00.003-05:00

We've had a few this past week or so.

1. Paul Lambert over at Hilliard schools voting "no" on the resolution of necessity. Keep in mind that this is the same Paul who commented on this blog that residents must have the chance to debate an issue on the way to the ballot box. So this means that Paul only voted "no" because he knew his vote would not keep the Hilliard issue off of the ballot. Principled? No.

2. Scott Galloway voting "no" the Olentangy ballot issue. Just like Paul, Gallowaste vote decided nothing. A lot of thunder but Galloway also stated the issue is needed. Principled? No.

3. The GOP for voting for repeal of Obamacare. They also knew their vote will not decide anything -- Obamacare will remain, at least until it can be morphed into Romneycare under a GOP president. If the GOP was true to its stance, they would be voting to repeal all of the unconstitutional nonsense from the last 150 years (since their party's founding). Principled? No.

Did anyone note that all above are Republicans -- in that they believe in Plato's Republic (right) instead of Rousseau's social contract (left)? None are advocating liberty. But did we expect as much?

OLSDLevy.com

2011-01-10T21:06:00.003-05:00

The levy calculator over at OLSDLevy.com has a neat, slick user interface. But it is chock-full of material errors, rendering it of little analytical value.

I believe this is the work of the gentleman who created a similar site for Westerville. Regardless, if you are looking to understand the financial issues around the Olentangy levy, OLSDLevy.com is not the place for you.

Note: All is not lost, the site is salvageable. If anyone knows the creator, send him my way and I will list the errors that he needs to correct. With little effort, he could have a usable site.

Paul, Paul, Paul

2010-12-30T19:07:00.002-05:00

Paul Lambert of the Hilliard School Board wrote this comment on my prior post:

You're ducking the question. Do you believe the flawed resolution would not have otherwise been addressed?

Do you think it is better to keep the levy off the ballot because of a technicality rather than allow your community to have the debate?

Do you have so little faith in the people of your community that you believe they will make the wrong decision if this levy is put up for a vote?

Paul forgets that the representatives of the community voted on the issue -- the vote was 3-2 for the levy. That a 3-2 vote is not sufficient to pass an permanent operating levy in not a "technicality." It is state law.

Is Paul really stating that the two Olentangy board members only voted against the levy because they believed the issue would pass over their "no" votes?

What does that say about integrity on school boards?

Seems Paul sees little integrity on the Olentangy board. Is Hilliard any different? One wonders.

Feasel’s follies

2010-12-29T19:19:00.003-05:00

A board president who doesn’t know the number of votes needed to pass board action items. Amazing. Did she forget to pull out her handy-dandy Ohio School Boards Association voting cheat sheet? Or is the desire to cheerlead the next levy simply too overwhelming?

The beauty of the vote is that not only was Feasel flawed, but so were the other former board presidents in the room (can you name them?), as well as the superintendent and treasurer (who, by the way, is the board secretary and parliamentarian).

Note: You got to wonder what else is going on at the board and district.

Paul Lambert defends the team

2010-12-29T19:16:00.004-05:00

Does he really comb through the minutes of every Ohio school board meeting looking for voting errors, etc? Or is Olentangy something special to him? Regardless, Lambert should be minding his own business -- his Hilliard business, not defending property tax increases in our district.

Note: I always suspected that Lambert wanna-be was tax consumer. I just wish he would consume Hillard taxes and leave us alone.

A 50% increase in 4 years

2010-12-15T23:12:00.002-05:00

7.9 mills in 2011 will make a 50% increase in district property tax rates for operating mills in only 4 years. A 50% increase?!? Are they mad, or just arrogant?

Or both? Hmmm.

Here's a short quiz

2010-09-16T21:49:00.003-04:00

The Olentangy most-recent Five-Year Forecast shows that the district violated its three-year levy pledge. Can anyone explain why my statement is a true?

Raising my taxes once again

2010-08-22T23:22:00.002-04:00

From the Delaware Gazette:

Rollback may be eliminated
Saturday, August 21, 2010
ANDREW TOBIAS
Staff Writer

County commissioners are scheduled to vote on Monday on whether or not to increase property taxes in Delaware County.

According to an agenda released Friday afternoon, commissioners will consider a resolution to eliminate a 1-mill property tax rollback. Doing so would raise an additional $6.3 million in annual revenue for the county, while costing property owners an additional $30.63 per $100,000 of property value.

The resolution, proposed by commissioner Tommy Thompson, says commissioners have determined “projected revenues are insufficient to maintain necessary services and appropriate cash reserves for a favorable bond rating for Delaware County” and would immediately pass the vote along to the county auditor for certification.

Any change in property tax levels would take effect next year, county auditor George Kaitsa said.

In a phone interview, Thompson said eliminating the rollback would help prevent future reductions in county services.

“I know nobody’s just chomping at the bit to be able to pay their taxes, but I think for the most part, people are understanding about the fact that they know services received cost X amount of bucks,” Thompson said. “And you either collect the monies and pay for the services, or you don’t collect the money, and you cut back on services.”

There are no immediate cuts such as layoffs of county staff on the table, but Thompson said more revenue would help stabilize the county’s finances.

Commissioner Ken O’Brien said in a phone interview that he will vote against the resolution.
“In these trying times, I do not think it is the time to raise taxes on people who are trying to put food on the table,” he said.

O’Brien said he is particularly disappointed since voters in 1996 approved a 10-year, 0.75-percent countywide sales tax, and commissioners promised to maintain a 1-mill rollback in exchange.

Also, O’Brien doesn’t believe the county would need to make immediate layoffs or cuts without additional revenue.

“It has not been articulated to me by other commissioners as to why or how we need this money, and how it should be spent,” O’Brien said.

So, the vote may come down to commissioner Todd Hanks, who has said he is “on the fence” on the issue, but who was not available for comment for this story. He has said the county maintaining a good bond rating, which allows the county to borrow money at a lower interest rate, is an important factor in his decision.

A preeminent bond rating agency has recommended that Delaware County maintain a cash reserve between $7.2 million and $7.9 million in order to preserve its current bond rating.
As of Thursday, the county had an unencumbered balance of $10.65 million in its general fund, Kaitsa said. However, $6.9 million of that is solely dedicated to the Delaware County Engineer’s Office’s roads and bridges fund, leaving only $3.7 million for general use.

Delaware County had a cash reserve of $11.5 million as recently as 2007, but commissioners have used much of the county’s “rainy day” funds over the past few years to offset budget deficits while mostly avoiding laying off staff.

While a deficit had been previously forecast for 2011, county officials now believe the county will manage to stay in the black next year. However, an unspecified deficit is now projected for 2012.
Delaware County’s property tax rollback has recently been as high as 1.8 mills, but commissioners in 2009 unanimously voted to reduce it to 1 mill.

Factoring into the commissioners’ decision is a possible loss of state funding as Ohio lawmakers seek to balance a projected $8 billion deficit in the state budget in the coming months. Kaitsa said the county could stand to lose up to $1.2 million in local government funding.

Commissioners are also considering whether to give raises to non-union county workers — salaries for these employees have been frozen since 2008. Payroll makes up about two-thirds the county’s $62.4 million budget.

atobias@delgazette.com

An analogy for the Fourth

2010-07-08T00:03:00.000-04:00

If you want to know where your cow last stood, head for the circle of flies. If you want to know where your incumbent congressman stands on the Fourth, head for the circle of military jets -- ironically called flybys.

Like flies to cow patties, so are flybys to the DC equivalent.

The empire began when the military replaced liberty on the Fourth.

Is support of public education a fundamental duty?

2010-07-05T21:49:00.003-04:00

According to musicman over at Save the Hilliard Schools, it is.

His proposition is this: Voter support for publics education is a fundamental duty.

But what is a fundamental duty? And why is public education necessarily so?

Oh, come on!

2010-06-22T23:32:00.006-04:00

According to the latest Olentangy mailing, "The dedicated volunteers of Olentangy's SCHOOL FUNDING ACTION COMMITTEE work to express the concerns of the community and board regarding the state's school funding system."

Dedicated? Oh, come on! The committee has only met once in three years.

Here's a tidbit from the minutes of the committee's last meeting (March 2010), "Scott Galloway added that there is a hole in the budget and it needs to be filled with economic development to help our tax base and take some of the pressure off the taxpayers."

Sure there is a big and growing hole in the budget. District employees are still getting over 6% salary increases (on average) in an economy that is struggling at best.

Why doesn't Scott reduce the budget to take pressure off of taxpayers? Why? Well, he would rather whine than represent the taxpayers. So, instead, he is chasing development that just won't happen.

And then he and the assorted district sycophants will blame the state via their resurrected dog-and-pony show -- the School Funding Action Committee.

These folks are amazing.

Olentangy does the impossible

2010-06-20T14:50:00.002-04:00

According to the latest Board Business, "During the 2009-10 school year, the district reduced its budget by more than $10.2 million over the next four years."

Did you get that?

In the last school year the district reduced its budget (a one year document) by more than $10.2 million over the next four years.

Olentangy does the impossible with the help of doublespeak. It's 1984 all over again.

Back from vacation

2010-06-19T23:16:00.001-04:00

Will start posting soon.

To the collectivists, he really was Papa Joe

2010-06-06T00:17:00.002-04:00

Just a fellow collectivists breacking some eggs to make an omelet. -- Jim

Over on the Blog at Mises.org:

It is just too much

Yuri Maltzev

Statues of Joseph Stalin have been torn down all over Europe. I have witnessed how happy Lithuanian youth were peeing on his fallen monument in the Park of Fallen Foibles in their capital Vilnius in 1991. Stalin killed more people than Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Castro and led the world in the worst socialist crimes.
To commemorate his “part of our history”, a statue of Stalin is included in the National D-Day Memorial dedicated in Bedford, Virginia, this Sunday, June 6. It is unbelievable how the idea of putting up a monument to a monster would come to anyone’s mind and – especially in Virginia – the cradle of our freedom! Sure enough erectors of the Stalin’s bust are soliciting funds from Obama and Virginia Governor Kaine to defray the cost of the monument to the mass murderer who exterminated millions of innocents in Europe and Asia and hated this country with such a passion that under his watch thousands of Americans were also killed in the dreadful Gulag. How can we void this?

Debasing? Maybe not for the educrats

2010-05-28T21:45:00.006-04:00

Daniel T. Willingham, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, made this comment in his latest article on the Teachers College Record:

In such a culture, a performance art piece in which the artist smears feces on his body would be seen as debasing and morally wrong, even though no one is harmed or treated unfairly. (emphasis mine)

Can anyone who is normal find that act to be something other than debasing?

The implication is that in Willingham's culture the above act is art. Art?!! What culture does he live in?

The bizarre world of the education establishment, of course.

The plan to destroy this nation

2010-05-27T21:56:00.000-04:00

Bree Picower, from New York University, defines the plan to meld the Three R's into Marxian social change. -- Jim

2010-05-22T11:26:00.002-04:00

A recent article of mine over on the Blog at Mises.org -- Jim

The New Bureaucratic Man
Jim Fedako

[An MP3 audio file of this article, read by Steven Ng, is available for download.]
There is something to Trotsky's vision of man under communism. From all historical appearances, man under a totalitarian state functions differently than a man under liberty. And degrees of man exist as society slowly turns from liberty to slavery.
The prevailing view is that man under socialized healthcare will remain the same as man today — a man living under a pseudo-free market. In fact, some even believe that man may progress. In this view, the doctor we see today will, at the very least, remain the same under socialized health care. Don't bet on it.
Unlucky Ducks
I once worked as a software contractor for a state agency (forgive me). The building where I worked was not your typical government building. It had a modern feel, with a decorative moat detailing the front entrance. The front door — guarded, of course — was accessible via a walkway bridge of sorts.
It's not what you may be thinking; it was all very subtle and nice. However, the drop from the bridge to the mulch-covered, bush-laden moat was a good three feet.
One year, at the beginning of spring, a duck built a nest in the moat, under one of the many bushes. As her ducklings hatched and grew, it came time for them to search for water. However, despite their repeated attempts, the ducklings could not jump from the moat to the walkway bridge.
One of the employees in the building asked the building manager if he (the employee) could place a wooden ramp to allow the ducklings to waddle out of the moat. Being a good state employee himself, the building manager called the state department of natural resources for guidance. The answer: since ducks are migratory birds, no one could do anything.
The next morning, someone plastered official signs around the entrance, stating that any attempt to help the ducks was a violation of law. No ramp, no water, no food. And violators — you know this already — would be prosecuted to the fullest extent.
Soon we had a real scene. The mother duck would leave the moat and encourage her ducklings to follow. They couldn't, of course. She would march back and forth on the walkway bridge and quack in desperation. All the while, the guard at the entrance stood watch, stopping any attempt to help.
Repeated calls to the bureaucrats at the department of natural resources were answered by a repetition of laws and fines. And not one of the department employees was going to go against the rules, or even ask for an exemption, for any reason.
The ducklings died days later.
There you have it: upon joining the state, the department of resource folks — folks who likely dreamed of careers helping wildlife — became staunch bureaucrats enforcing rules over reason.
Healthcare
I have had many good experiences with doctors, nurses, and such. Our pre-Obamacare system was not perfect, but it suffered from nothing that the free market couldn't cure. Nevertheless, our elected officials believe otherwise. And they have a lot of support from the masses, who, I believe, are deluded.
Many proponents of socialized healthcare envision a system where their current providers remain, and society, hidden behind the state, pays the bills. But man changes by degree as liberty is lost. So the smiling doctor and caring nurse you trust will become the faces of the nomenklatura and apparatchiks. They can become nothing else.
Yuri Maltsev, former economist under Gorbachev, detailed the truths of Soviet medicine in a recent Mises.org article. He wrote of drunken medical professionals roaming the halls of filthy hospitals — hospitals devoid of necessary equipment and supplies. And he wrote of a system where adherence to the rules of the bureaucracy trumped reason and sanity.
Meeting quotas was the mission, not serving the patients. So people died due to the rules of the bureaucracy, and no one could or would do otherwise.
Do we really believe the conduct of Russians under socialist rule was due to genetics or geography? Do we really believe there is something unique about Russians or Russia — and all the other groups who lived under socialist rule? And do we really believe Americans under that very same system would comport themselves in a different manner — as if altruism were genetic in the 50 states? Does anyone really believe any of that?
We have a tough case to make. We have the supporters of socialized healthcare dreaming that everything will remain the same, except someone else will pay the bill. It's a nice fantasy. But a fantasy, nonetheless. And fantasies can be hard to defeat at times.

On our side, we have the science of economics that says the system will collapse in the end. It will collapse under its own weight due to the state's inability to allocate resources efficiently. And just as important, we have history that shows how man behaves when under socialism — how man will behave until the system finally collapses. And let me tell you, that behavior ain't pretty.
Your doctor and nurse, no matter how nice today, will become the bureaucracy. They will see you in terms of state rules and regulations. They will push you out into the cold rather than risk having you die on site — and them having to suffer the consequences of a bad report to the central authorities.
Of course, your beloved healthcare professionals will not change overnight from Dr. Jekyll to Mr. Hyde. No, they will slowly change as the cloud of socialized medicine and accompanying bureaucracy incessantly rots their souls (as it rots our souls as well). It will happen — it has to.
To think otherwise is to be that mother duck, expecting officials of the state to rescue her ducklings because that is what employees of the department of natural resources are supposed to do: rescue wildlife.

Letting the bed bugs bite

2010-05-15T22:56:00.000-04:00

A recent post of mine over on the Blog at Mises.org:

Letting the bed bugs bite

Jim Fedako

Who would let the bed bugs bite? The feds of course.

If you are looking for a reason to support the Tenth Amendment movement, turn a bedsheet or two in Ohio.

Seems the EPA no longer allows the pesticide Propoxur to be sold for home use. Why?

Is Propoxur unsafe? Hardly, Propoxur is "a decades-old pesticide that many see as the best, and cheapest, way to stop the voracious bugs."

What changed? According to Andrew Christman, owner of the Ohio Exterminating Co. and president of the Ohio Pest Management Association, "Propoxur had long been labeled for use in homes. It lost that status last year because the manufacturer had declined to pay to re-test and re-register the product."

So the manufacturer decides that the cost for federal testing and registration is too high and now "[m]any low-income families and elderly residents repeatedly suffer from bites because they cannot afford extermination, which generally costs between $200 and $500 per application."

Remind me, who does government benefit?

FFF ... again

2010-05-14T21:39:00.000-04:00

From a recent edition of the Email Update from the Future of Freedom Foundation:

Monday, May 3, 2010
If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too.
— William Somerset Maugham, Strictly Personal [1941]

Not invoking Godwin's law

2010-05-13T21:30:00.001-04:00

Sure, it sounds like a violation of Godwin's law, but it's poignant nonetheless.

From a recent edition of the Email Update from the Future of Freedom Foundation:

Thursday, May 13, 2010
An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to insure our domestic security and protect our homeland.
— Adolf Hitler, on the creation of the Gestapo

"Marx is not all wrong"

2010-05-11T22:39:00.001-04:00

Not my quote. And it isn't from my good friends over at Marxists.org. The quote is actually from a recent edition of Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education -- published by Columbia University's Teachers College, the ideological center of public education.

While economic Marxism is gone (or hidden behind the veil of Keynesianism), cultural Marxism is alive and well in most colleges and universities, along with all public schools.

Who else believes this nonsense:

The second reason is that Marx is not all wrong. Workers have become alienated from what they produce.

It's 2010 and Marx's theory of worker alienation is being championed by the teachers of teachers over at Columbia University.

And all that effort and indoctrination is not going to waste. Your child's teacher is reading this nonsense and saying, "I better include that in my next lesson plan."

And she will.

Pat Tiberi v. the (supposed) Greater Evil

2010-05-10T18:44:00.008-04:00

The Proposition:

It is better to have voted for Tiberi than the (supposed) greater evil who ran against him in the last election.

The Flaw:

My singular vote has no real effect on a congressional election – a singular vote never does. Keep in mind that there has not been an election that Tiberi won by one vote (no Congressman ever has won by just one vote). So, regardless who I voted for in the last election, Tiberi would still be in Congress. Therefore, my singular vote (if I vote) had (and has) no real effect, whatsoever.

In addition, Tiberi has never been the deciding vote on any issue that is important to me. Had the (supposed) greater evil been elected, life today would be the same. With or without Tiberi, we would still have TARP, the Bailout, ObamaCare, etc. Therefore, Tiberi is of no consequence, whatsoever.

It amazes me how many people inflate the impact of their personal vote. And it amazes me how many people will vote for Tiberi even though he voted for TARP and the Bailout (in the face of an overwhelming majority of constituents opposing that vote). He voted and voters said, “I’ll never vote for him again.” Yet, they will vote for Tiberi again because they fear the (supposed) greater evil running against him, inflating the impact of their own vote along the way.

Look, your vote will not change the end result of any election. But if you vote for Tiberi in the next election, you will be making a public statement that you support folks who supported TARP, the Bailout, etc. And you will be empowering Tiberi (and his ilk) to continue playing you as the fool.

Ironically, there is a Dispatch web-only letter to the editor by someone who wants RomneyCare (a neighbor of mine, actually -- a nice guy, but a useful idiot of the state, nonetheless). The writer likes Tiberi since Tiberi desires nationalized health care – though, a lower cost, Republican version (an oxymoron).

Of course, this is true. Call Tiberi’s office and his staffers will set you straight. Tiberi believes that health care is a right and that government must run health care. In addition, to keep costs low, government must run our lives in totality – the paternal and maternal state (fascialism).

In the end, is this any different from Obama, ObamaCare, and any (supposed) greater evil running against Tiberi?

Notes:

Your vote has no impact on an election. It is simply a statement of your core beliefs – you just add a tick to the column of one of the candidates, but never tip the scale in anyone’s favor. If you vote for Tiberi, be certain that you understand he holds your values in contempt. He will vote your liberties away the first chance he gets – which makes him the same as the (supposed) greater evil..

Here's a title for you

2010-05-08T23:18:00.000-04:00

PETER LUCAS is a lecturer of peace education in the Department of International and Transcultural Studies at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Enough said.

What's in your head, teacher?

2010-05-08T23:01:00.001-04:00

So you are attending for child's first teacher conference. You are nervous. You want to be assured by the professional at the other side of the table that your child is doing fine. Your thinking, "I wonder if Johnny is up to grade level."

Across the table, Johnny's teacher is remembering the very last comment she made to her class that afternoon, "You know I’m not your major teacher in this class. You guys are. There are 32 of you and one of me. So, don’t tune each other out. You all are teachers and just think, if you learn three new things a day how much you’ll know by the end of the year."

Not the "major teacher?" No way. In these instances, the elementary students are the authorities -- 'cause it sure ain't the teacher.

Note: This article is from the TCRecord.org, the website for the nonsense that is the Teachers College of Columbia University. Not to worry, this nonsense is not only Ivy League. It's in OSU and in your local public school.

Science for the State

2010-05-07T21:25:00.003-04:00

A recent article of mine over on the Blog at Mises.org -- the final version of an article that evolved here and here:

Science for the State
Jim Fedako

It sometimes seems that every regime needs to find its justification in science. Ideology is fine, to a point. But the final arbiter of legitimacy resides, or so it seems, in science. So what of science?
The Soviet Union had its ideological foundation in dialectical materialism — that edgy methodology that combines, you guessed it, dialectics and materialism. In essence, so the theory goes, matter moves from one state to another in an endless ascendancy from the lower to higher.
I know, blah, blah, blah. Just a load of muddled nonsense. But it was the Soviet religion. And everything had to be justified through it.
So in the 1920s, along comes this quack by the name of Lysenko. According to Wikipedia,
he rejected Mendelian genetics in favor of the hybridization theories of Russian horticulturist Ivan Vladimirovich Michurin, and adopted them into a powerful political-scientific movement termed Lysenkoism.
Helena Sheehan picks up the story noting that Lysenko
subsequently became famous for the discovery of "vernalisation," an agricultural technique that allowed winter crops to be obtained from summer planting by soaking and chilling the germinated seed for a determinate period of time.
More muddled nonsense. But since Lysenko and his nonsense — er, theories — fit the nonsense that is dialectical materialism, he became a sweetheart of the state bureaucracy.
And as Lysenkoism grew in power and prestige, so did the pressure on those who dared object.
Alternate theories were rejected and proponents forced from positions and jailed, and sometimes even sentenced to death. Mendelian genetics was pushed from the halls of academia into the hushed-hushed backrooms where no one listened, except spies for the state.
There were two other results of Lysenkoism worth noting: food shortages and waste. But, hey, what's a few cracked eggs among friends, especially when the omelet is for the state?
The key to my opening statement is not that science needs to justify the state. The key is that the state needs to find the science that will justify its (the state's) existence.
So the state creates its justifying science and, lo and behold, that very same science justifies the state. In Lysenko's words,
Long live the Party of Lenin and Stalin, which discovered Michurin for the world and created all the conditions for the progress of advanced materialist biology in our country.
Glory to the great friend and protagonist of science, our leader and teacher, comrade Stalin!
Does any of this sound familiar? In the 1930s, the state adopted Keynesian economics. It did not do so because the system made sense. No, the state adopted Keynesian economics because it justified the state and the state's profligate ways.
Keynes was the Lysenko of the Roosevelt administration. The state declared Keynes a genius and worked to control his opposition. No Siberian Gulags, just academic ones. But the chilling result was the same here as in the Soviet Union. The state's science became the science, and science and state lived happily ever after. For a while anyway.
When Stalin died, Lysenko was first discredited by Khrushchev.
Nevertheless, Lysenko was to find favour again, and at that with Khrushchev, for his researches into composting and breeding dairy cows with high butter fat, themes both dear to Khrushchev who wanted to raise the USSR's milk output.
In the end, the Soviets finally recognized that Lysenko was a fraud, though it took a half a century.
Here in the United States, it took us almost the same amount of time to begin to question Keynesianism. And just like Lysenkoism, Keynesianism fell out of favor only to subsequently return to favor once again — nothing like more butter fat to whet the appetite of the political class.
Of course, Keynes is gone — his long run ended years ago. But Keynesianism lives on through its adherents. And Paul Krugman is the most visible one we have today.
But Krugman is just another Lysenko — peddling nonsense that justifies the state. As one of its most prominent and vocal proponents, Krugman is an influential activist for the political class and the status quo. So, of course, he is blessed by the state.

Most importantly, Krugman is willing to see more than a few eggs cracked in order to serve up a state-sized omelet — I think he calls his special omelet the Laureate, but I am not certain of that.

Every state needs justification. And the justifiers are always welcomed and cheered by the state. So we should not be shocked that a false science — a science that props up the state — is embraced by the state and associated sycophants.
But we must always remember that in the end, the nonsense is revealed for all to see, with the proponent receiving his due discredit. But how long do we have to wait? And what will be the final result? Only time will tell.

Eight vote loss

2010-05-06T21:36:00.001-04:00

Really nine, I suppose. Could it have had something to do with this letter to the editor? ;-)

Life of an article -- final version

2010-05-05T23:02:00.004-04:00

A recent article of mine over on the Blog at Mises.org -- the final version of an article that evolved here and here:

Time Is on Our Side
Jim Fedako

Living at the intellectual margin can challenge even the most ardent advocate of free markets and liberty. However, I contend that history is on our side.

In the preface to his book Marx's Religion of Revolution (1989), Gary North writes of an intellectual movement that was for years confined to the dark recesses of coffeehouses and tearooms.

Igor Shafarevich, the Soviet mathematician and critic of Marxism, made a very important observation in his classic book, The Socialist Phenomenon (1975). He said that peculiar little socialist groups debate for years about the details of their odd-ball social theories, and then, almost overnight, their ideas become widely believed, and societies are restructured in terms of them.

When I am feeling down because of the political landscape, I think of that passage. Change one word and you have this bit of encouragement, "He said that peculiar little anarcholibertarian groups debate for years about the details of their oddball social theories, and then, almost overnight, their ideas become widely believed, and societies are restructured in terms of them."

What a powerful statement. And a statement that may soon ring true, if we all do our part.

At one point during the recent The Birth and Death of the Fed conference, I sat with three other Austrians in the hotel sitting room discussing the details of our supposedly oddball social theories — the theories of free markets and liberty. Around us sat other peculiar little groups proposing various means for these very same theories to become widely believed once again, to serve as the guiding lights for a near-overnight restructuring of society. While the theories we debated are still not mainstream, a tipping point of sorts may be near.

In the not-too-distant future, it is likely that we will see the ideas of free markets and liberty begin to take hold. And we will watch as societies start to restructure themselves without the burden of the oppressive state. Questions arise: How will this restructuring occur? Will it be through political action?

Politics is about today — tomorrow be damned. The politician wants to get elected and stay elected, and retire well off. He only cares about getting votes from constituents he abhors. He cares nothing of their lives, their struggles, or their successes.

In the politician's mind, he is of the vaunted political class, and his constituents are nothing more than groundlings to be manipulated and entertained by his double entendres and rhetorical sleights of hand. So it is no wonder that heartless politicians cannot stand the sight of the little folks, those whose votes decide the next coronation — the bestowing of the power and the prestige each politician so desperately desires.

It is obvious that politics is not the answer. And neither, it turns out, is violent force — politics by other means. This is a nation conceived in the ideas of liberty. Given time, ideas would have won the day. But our forefathers resorted to force. And by doing so, they birthed, so to speak, the desire for a new state — a powerful central authority to guide the several free states.

Shortly thereafter, unable to control their fetish for a state, our forefathers went behind closed doors and crafted the so-called perfect union that secured the blessings of liberty to themselves alone, leaving their posterity to suffer under an ever-growing Leviathan — a Leviathan now larger by magnitudes than the one they had so recently deposed.

You may object: Wasn't the Soviet Union the product of both political action and violent force? Yes, to a point. The actual revolutions (February and October) were more political than violent.[1] And even that political action was the product of something else. What was that something else?

Ideas, of course.

Ideas have consequences that, in the long run, trump the politics of the day. Nevertheless, we are currently engaged in the battle over ideas. And as Mises so clearly stated, it is a battle we must all fight.

Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders; no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others. And no one can find a safe way out for himself if society is sweeping towards destruction. Therefore everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle. None can stand aside with unconcern; the interests of everyone hang on the result. Whether he chooses or not, every man is drawn into the great historical struggle, the decisive battle into which our epoch has plunged us. (Ludwig von Mises, Socialism)

Each of us carries this burden. And we must engage in the great historical struggle that none of us asked for. But a struggle that is ours nonetheless.

Remember the peculiar groups and their oddball theories. And remember the tipping point. The failures of the state are becoming obvious and folks are taking notice. It is our responsibility to vigorously thrust ourselves into the intellectual battle and relentlessly advocate for free markets and liberty.

Each individual who embraces our oddball theories and joins our peculiar groups brings us that much closer to the tipping point and pending restructuring — and free markets and liberty.

From the Berean Call

2010-05-04T21:54:00.000-04:00

HT: From our good friends over at The Berean Call -- Jim

CLIMATE CHANGE IS THE TOTALITARIAN'S DREAM COME TRUE
Christian Theologian on Earth Day: 'Climate Change Is the Totalitarian's Dream Come True' [Excerpts]
For E. Calvin Beisner and his colleagues at the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation (CASC), every day is Earth Day because Christians are called by God to be good stewards of the planet and its inhabitants.
Beisner believes that it is not carbon emissions but global warming activism and international climate treaties that are a threat to the nation's future and the world's poorest populations.
"Climate change is the totalitarian's dream come true," Beisner, founder of the CASC, said at a conference on Thursday at the Family Research Council in Washington. "It offers a rationale for government intrusion into every aspect of life for every person on Earth."
Beisner, who is also the national spokesman for the CASC, is a teacher and author who frequently speaks on the connection between religion and environmentalism.
Beisner painted a chilling picture of what would happen if the United States signed on to the kind of international climate-change treaty proposed at a United Nations conference in Copenhagen last year."
Global warming alarmists see each new human being in terms of his or her 'carbon footprint,' and already many are saying that the best way to fight global warming is for everyone to have just one child so that the population will shrink," Beisner said.
The enforcement of a U.N.-style treaty would mean a global government's intrusion into how people live their private lives - "everything from the temperature at which you keep your house to whether to drive a large, crash-worthy vehicle or a small car that conserves fuel but is a death trap in an accident," Beisner said.
In his speech, Beisner said that Christians should be concerned about global warming policies because they affect myriad issues, such as the sanctity of human life, individual liberty, the survival of free enterprise and free markets in the United States, compassion for the poor around the world, and a sovereign America with the kind of limited government envisioned by the Founding Fathers.
Christians are commanded by God to care for the poor, which Beisner said would suffer the most from the kind of environmental controls and alternative energy plans proposed by both the United Nations and the U.S. Congress.

I'll defend you right to drink raw milk

2010-05-03T23:16:00.000-04:00

A recent post of mine over on the Blog at Mises.org:

I'll defend you right to drink raw milk

Jim Fedako

But, please, don't drink it in front of me.

A friend of mine in the liberty movement drinks raw milk. That's not for me.

What really offends me is that adults -- such as my friend -- have to sneak around in order to buy something they believe is healthy.

In a guest commentary in my local paper, I wrote: "Raw milk is not the issue, it's a symptom. The issue is our desire to rule over our neighbors through the use of government. And that desire gets fed each time another intrusive law passes without protest."