‘Rite Idea: Vote ‘Yes’ on Issue 6
‘Rite Idea: Voters should pass the 6.9-mill levy
Superintendent Gregory C. Hutchings, Jr. tweeted this photo of himself putting a pro-levy sign in his front yard. This is Hutchings’ first levy as superintendent, and the district is asking for the lowest millage, 6.9 mills, in more than a decade. The vote is May 6.
If you move to Shaker Heights, you know what you’re getting.
You know that the city has quality schools, but that quality comes with a cost. You know that it’s a “residential community,” a town without enough businesses to handle most of the tax burden, and it requires higher property taxes to maintain strong schools. But you also know that, as a teacher paraphrased former Superintendent Mark Freeman at a board of education meeting earlier this year, “You get what you pay for.”
And sometimes you need to pay a little more.
Only 10 percent of Shaker’s tax revenue comes from local businesses; compare that to 30 percent in Solon and 50 percent in Beachwood. In other words, because we don’t have a mall to tax, homeowners must foot most of the bill for quality schools. It can be a big bill. Homeowners in this school district pay the highest property tax rate in Ohio, a tax rate that will likely surpass four percent if this levy passes. The owner of a $200,000 home will pay $483 more each year, bringing his or her total to $8,076 per annum. We don’t love this approach, but unless there are plans to build a mall in the Fernway neighborhood, this is the best way to maintain our schools.
“We are all homeowners, too,” Board of Education member Annette Tucker Sutherland said. “We are very aware” of the tax burden placed on Shaker residents.
In addition, Superintendent Gregory C. Hutchings, Jr., has emphasized cost efficiency much more than his predecessor. When the board revealed the levy would be 6.9 mills — the last four had all exceeded nine — teachers gave board members and Hutchings an ear full.
“A 6.9-mill levy is not enough,” one teacher said. “You cannot create great success on the cheap.”
Another said, “We cannot let a fear of millage prevent us [from] providing the world-class education Shaker is renowned for.”
We believe some taxpayers would disagree that the district is funded “on the cheap.”
This levy is a necessary evil, but its more modest cost reflects a healthy reconsideration of Shaker homeowners’ role in funding the schools. The district is asking for less, and they’ve said they won’t ask again for four years. Over that time, the district is also cutting costs elsewhere, $1 million each year for the next five years. The district’s belt-tightening may lead to changes in the classroom — teachers recently learned that in 2015-16 and beyond non-IB Diploma Programme classes must exceed 15 students or be cut — but if taxpayers can make sacrifices for the schools, we believe the schools can make sacrifices for the taxpayers.
These sacrifices, though, cannot rob students of a quality education. But we trust the district will provide no less.
This story will appear on page 11 of the April 25 issue of The Shakerite.
Mark Zetzer | Apr 27, 2014 at 1:20 am
Shaker Heights schools are not rated very well at all by the Ohio Department of Education, and do not warrant anywhere near the tax rate we are currently paying, let alone the new rate if the levy passes. Shaker is a residential community more like Chagrin Falls or Cleveland Heights, not a commercial area like Beachwood or Solon, so our public school system should not try to spend like we have a large commercial tax base. We don’t, and our homes should not be taxed at commercial rates to compensate for that. My organization, Grow Shaker, is opposing this levy and may put a property tax repeal up for a vote in a future Shaker Heights election. Not to hurt the schools but to help Shaker’s tax base of people and businesses stabilize and grow again so that the school system will remain strong in the future. For the love of Shaker, vote no on Issue 6! You can order our yard sign at info@GrowShaker.org. — Mark Zetzer
Julie Hullett | Apr 28, 2014 at 10:37 pm
Mr. Zetzer-
I understand and agree that Shaker Heights High School is not highly rated by the Ohio Department of Education or by the U.S. News and World Report. In fact, I could not even find SHHS on the Best High Schools List. However, this is not entirely Shaker’s fault. My Human Relations class researched schools that ranked near the best in the nation. We found that these top schools are not like Shaker Heights. Many are located in extremely rich suburbs. Some are also charter schools. Many were STEM certified schools. But the fact that stood out to me the most is how these public high schools act private-you have to apply to get in. This way, these top schools only accept students with the highest GPAs and test scores. In my opinion, these schools have an unfair advantage because they pick who comes to their school. Shaker Heights has the advantage of working with students from all different socioeconomic backgrounds and helps each and every one of them succeed. How can you expect Shaker to compete with schools who only accept the best kids? In addition, if you are not currently satisfied with Shaker Schools, cutting our funding is certainly not going to make the schools any better. If the levy does not pass, some of Shaker’s great programs and opportunities will be cut. If you want better schools, give us the funding we need to not only keep up our great schools but also to improve them! Vote yes on Issue 6!
Mark Zetzer | May 2, 2014 at 9:36 am
Ms. Hullett, I’m not expecting Shaker Schools to compete academically. We embrace diversity in Shaker Heights, and I agree with you that diversity is a good thing to have that dollars and numbers do not measure. Diversity not only of race but of income are why I first moved to Shaker Heights 21 years ago, and why I am raising my three children in our integrated South Shaker neighborhood and sending them to Shaker Schools.
What I do expect, however, is that Shaker Schools also not try to compete fiscally with school districts that have large commercial tax bases. My home is being taxed a what is a commercial rate elsewhere, and this is not only unfair but prohibitive. My family and I are literally being pushed out of our home because our incomes can no longer keep up with the rising cost of living and rising tax burdens.
If anyone in Shaker feels that our public schools really need more money, they are free to donate to the school treasury any amount of cash they wish. After all, Shaker Heights still ranks among the extremely rich suburbs you refer to, at least from my point of view in our lowly two-family home in Shaker’s low-rent district.
For the Love of ALL of Shaker Heights, not just the wealthy, Vote No on Issue 6! Preserve Shaker’s income diversity!
Mark Zetzer | May 2, 2014 at 11:34 am
Sorry for the typos, please edit as well as moderate!
Julie Hullett | Apr 25, 2014 at 11:37 am
Thanks for writing this article! I hope the levy passes so Shaker Schools can keep giving a great education!!