Vouchers are not meant to follow pupils to private schools in Ohio | Letters

The problem with vouchers

I read Aaron Churchill’s guest column in the Beacon Journal, which was published on March 22. While Mr. Churchill has a compelling argument about tax dollars following the student, he may have overlooked a few details.

1) The Ohio Department of Education’s page for chartered private schools clearly states: “These schools are not supported by local or state tax dollars and require families to pay tuition.” Chartered Nonpublic Schools are eligible for the Administrative Cost Reimbursement Program, Auxiliary Services Program, and Student Transportation Services.”

Because these schools are not permitted to receive public tax dollars by the ODE, why should the money follow the students? The ODE has not authorized Gov. DeWine’s push for vouchers to private schools!

2) We also have a problem with gerrymandered districts in Ohio. Gerrymandering also has a negative impact on school district funding, particularly in low-income districts.

3) As President Donald Trump pushes to eliminate the Federal Department of Education, there will be a ripple effect on school funding across the country.

4) We also have a distorted property tax issue in Ohio when it comes to school funding. Several state representatives are working to improve property tax evaluations and reevaluations. I’m not holding my breath for those efforts, which I don’t see happening anytime soon. People should not be forced into foreclosure or bankruptcy because of their property taxes.

Thurl Carmany, Ravenna

School funding question

When I read the guest editorial “Funding should follow students, even those in charter schools,” a question came to mind. Only a portion of school funding is allocated to teachers, books, materials, and other expenses.

That is based on the number of students. A significant portion of the funding is allocated to school construction, maintenance, repair, capital improvement, and other activities. These costs are typically determined by the age of the buildings rather than the number of students enrolled.

While the number of computers may decrease as students leave school, the need to maintain the electrical system, plumbing, cafeteria/dining/kitchen equipment, and other facilities remains constant.

I’d like to see a funding analysis that takes into account a school’s fixed costs as well as the number of students. When a school loses funding, does the funding required to maintain the buildings also decrease? If so, why does the building not grow smaller or younger?

Lynn M. Clark, Akron

Support for a local levy

Highland Local Schools will appear on the May 6 ballot, and I will vote YES for strong, safe schools. My wife and I moved to Sharon Township in 2020 so that our children could attend Highland. We now have a high schooler, a middle schooler, and an elementary school student.

We couldn’t be happier with their education and the district’s arts programs, especially the musicals. On May 6, voters in Granger, Hinckley, and Sharon townships will have a choice: stay home and hope the school measure passes, or spend a few minutes voting yes to protect property values and students.

Voting no is simply not an option, especially as Ohio cuts state funding for public education. Highland is one of the best school districts in Ohio, and this election marks the first time the district has requested additional funding for operations in 14 years.

Regardless of what Columbus residents want, Highland’s taxes will remain entirely within the district. Voting yes for Highland Local Schools is an investment in our community and future. Nathan Eppink, Sharon Township.

More like a scam everyday