School board cuts $2 million from budget

Sports and extracurricular activities dominated discussions Wednesday evening as Perkins Schools leaders agreed to hike pay-to-participate fees and eliminate 15 staff members.
Alissa Widman Neese
Jun 13, 2013


The topic was fitting for the packed Perkins High School auditorium, where more than 200 people cheered on their side of a contentious levy debate with applause and praise.

Reductions approved Wednesday totaled about $2 million, a result of a failed May levy and state funding cuts, board members said.

Pay-to-participate fees for high school students increased to $730 per sport for the upcoming school year, up from $150 approved in April. Costs for dual enrollment classes, clubs and music activities also increased substantially for high school and middle school students.

“I don’t approve of this, and I don’t think you guys understand,” a mother shouted from the back of the crowded auditorium. “I want my son’s senior year to be a good one, not ‘mom and dad couldn’t pay for me to play my sports.’”

Board president Matt Koisor told parents no board members think the cuts are a good idea, however, they do recognize their necessity.

“Unfortunately we only have a certain amount of money to balance our budget,” Koisor said. “None of these cuts are cuts we want to make.”

Click here for related articles, video and photos. 

If township voters approve the district’s August levy, the reductions could be reversed and pay-to-participate fees will return to normal, superintendent Jim Gunner said. The district is proposing a 10-year, 6.73-mill levy, nearly 2 mills larger than its May proposal.

Before Wednesday’s cuts, Perkins Schools was projecting a $2.3 million deficit for the upcoming school year, with a budget of about $21 million, according to its most recent five-year financial forecast. It was set to spend all its reserve cash by 2015.

In early April, board members approved two rounds of permanent cuts totaling $12 million for the next four years. 

In addition to sports fees, several parents also voiced concerns Wednesday about cuts to music and art programming.

Conversation was calm, but tense, until parent Jason Dulaney commanded attention with an objective perspective. He criticized the board’s ineffective communication strategies, but also reprimanded voters for going to the polls without proper knowledge of the issues.

An angry “no” vote doesn’t punish board members or administrators — it only punishes students, said Dulaney, a levy supporter.

“I don’t want you to vote ‘yes’ and I don’t want you to vote ‘no,’” he said. “I just want you to vote informed.”

Levy committee members, many district parents, remained in the auditorium after the meeting to recruit supporters for their cause. They will kick off their campaign with a meeting 7 p.m. Monday in the Perkins High School cafeteria.

Township voters haven’t approved an emergency operating levy for the district since 2000.

Perkins Schools cuts approved

•Furry Elementary School: 3 teachers (art, music, physical education)
•Meadowlawn Intermediate School: 5 teachers (art, music, computer, gifted, physical education)
•Briar Middle School: 2 teachers (computer, music), 1 guidance counselor
•Perkins High School: 2 teachers (health, Chinese)
•District Office: 1 communications director, 1 EMIS secretary, full pay-to-participate fees

TOTAL SAVINGS: About $2 million for upcoming school year

Pay-to-participate fee amounts approved

•High school athletics: $730 per sport
•High school extracurricular clubs: $150 per club
•High school band or choir: $220 per music participation
•Middle school athletics: $185 per sport
•Middle school clubs: $150 per club
•High school dual enrollment classes: $300 per class per semester



Agree, citizen.


$3,000,000 + design loan for a school supposedly not being built
$1,700,000 + gift to the stadium project - post recession
$1,200,000 + student laptop program - middle and high school
$2,000,000 + being moved annually from Operating to PI.

Are these numbers correct?

Strong Schools ...

We can't move forward on the buildings! Dr. Gunner stated that the buildings will be put on hold at the board meeting!


If there is any threat that these children, teachers, staff and public could even remotely get sick from being in those schools, why are we still using them?

Edwin Ison



Government jobs, best paying jobs in the area.




Do the YES voters consider the loss of fifteen teaching jobs as smart or desperate?



In response to your question "Do the YES voters consider the loss of fifteen teaching jobs as smart or desperate?". In my opinion, ALL voters should feel that it is a huge step in the wrong direction. I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but this YES voter sees it as being necessary due to continued cuts in state funding, coupled with the fact that Perkins has passed only one "additional funds" levy in the past 18 years, for 2.9 mills. In comparison, one of our neighboring districts have passed an additional 26 mills in that same time frame.


As a new member to the community, you would think that. I feel for those fifteen teachers and their families.


After reading citizen's many comments about a 3 million dollar bank loan related to building a new school I went to the school website and read through all of the BOE meeting minutes from March through May.

Wouldn't the district treasurer need the Boards approval in an open meeting for this expenditure? I couldn't find anything related to this. I did, however, learn that the district has cut more staff than most realize.


Good point on the loan, eriemom. We need to fact check this for accuracy. I believe the loan was taken out well before March 2013.

Sad that one staff member should have to lose their job.



In response to your comments "Seriously Bherrle. As a new member to the community, you would think that. I bet those fifteen teachers and their families aren't having a good night."

The fact that I have only two years in the community is what it is. Each day I learn more about the history I have missed. If the points I'm making aren't valid, then you have nothing to worry about. I'm not trying to change your mind. I encourage everyone to vote in August, even those who publicly state that they are a "no" vote and will not change their mind. I post to make sure that the facts are out there, and in some cases give my opinion/perspective, for anyone on this blog, Yes, No's, or Undecided's.

I've had several people in the last two days come up to me and say that what I am saying makes sense, and that it is good to have some fresh perspective on the issues. I would ask you, why do you feel that my lack of time in the district is a negative factor?

Lastly - I know none of them personally, but no, I don't imagine those 15 families are having a good night, and every day I pray for them and this community.

Thomas Paine

Bherrle- As another yes voter despite my trepidation with the administration,- I am glad to have you in the community- virtually and physically. I look at you being new to the community as a positive. A fresh look at things is always good to have. Doing things just because they have always been done that way bothers me.


Easy to say when both of you still have your jobs??? What about those that just lost their jobs. I wish the teachers would speak out more and stand up to this administration. Credit to those that do!

Thomas Paine

A) How do you know that we both still have our jobs? B)Everyone is asking the school to be fiscally responsible- (The state requires them to balance a budget too) - Yet nobody wants anything cut they all want their programs and but refuse to increase their taxes. You cant have both, something has to give. The fact is over the past 13 years this community has shown zero additional support. Its a lose lose situation for the school to be in. I am right with the negative views on taking money from operation to fund property improvements. Especially right after the people voted no for the grandiose school that this community would never be able to support in the future once it was completed. I have disagreed from the beginning on their approach, we are a conservative rural community, building something like that doesn't sit well when most of us make do with what we have and work and save for things we want. But with comments like yours no wonder we don't attract new people to the community.


We don't attract new people to the community, Mr. Paine because our schools are only rated "efficient" by the state, you stand a pretty good chance of getting mesothelioma from our school buildings, according to Gunner and there are no jobs available.

Strong Schools ...

Actually, we do attract people to the community. Families move to Perkins because our schools provide a great education. Perkins is way ahead when it comes to technology, STEM, and up to date teaching practices. We just had someone move onto our street with young children and they are excited to be apart of Perkins Schools in the fall.

I would encourage anyone to go to the schools and ask for a tour of the buildings. Make sure you ask someone for a tour so they can clearly show you all of the problems.

Support our students and community-Vote Yes!


Is it possible that the STEM and multi-age programs may have driven us to an "efficient" rating rather than "excellent with distinction"? Just a thought. Also, if you dare enter the buildings, do so at your own risk. We may be the next "Clyde" according to Dr. Gunner.



In response to your comment "Easy to say when both of you still have your jobs! You can sit next to each other in the new bleachers and watch all six kids play football this fall."

You are wrong again, and I really encourage you to make sure you know the facts before making comments like this. I understand first hand what it means to be without a job. Unfortunetly, the career opportunity that brought our family here two years ago did not turn out to be what I envisioned it being, I am currently unemployed, and am engaged in an intensive job search, focused on staying right where we are. God moved us here, and he will provide the right opportunity here if we are meant to stay here. Our focus is staying here.

So now that I've put that out there, I'll take advantage of a free opportunity to network. My background is in Operations Management & Logistics, with a focus on Transportation Management, however I have experience with Warehousing and Inventory Management also. My past three positions where Transportation Manager, Director of Operations, and Service Center Manager. I also have plenty of P&L and finance experience. Should anyone have any leads or suggestions, my email address is, and I would be glad to forward my resume to anyone who may want to pass it on.

Judging by past comments, I know that I just opened myself up to personal attack. I expect some on this blog to say something to the effect of "Oh, ok, now I understand why you are for the levy. You want someone else to pay for your kids education, sports, etc. because you don't have a job right now." My response to that - Not true. First, I fully expect to be re-employed soon, and our goal is to stay right here. Second, I was a levy supporter (albeit not very well informed then) soon after we moved in 2011, and in fact I knew that our taxes would likely go up in the first couple years we lived here, due to how low they are (in comparison to the region, and to what we paid in Pennsylvania.) My wife and I made sure we put ourselves in home that we could afford if taxes did go up, factoring in what I saw as a tax issue in 2011. Third - absent the pay-to play fees, all parents are still paying something out-of-pocket for their children to participate in their activities. For example, we are already spending over $500 for our daughter to be a Varsity Cheerleader this coming fall. That is not a complaint, we have no problem with that contribution. The idea that we are expecting others to fully pay for our kids to participate is not a valid one.


At least our children will get an oversimplified "efficient" education and a free laptop. Oh, and if you listen to Dr. Gunner, maybe mesothelioma to go with it??? Dr. Gunner's words, not mine! When you made the big decision to choose Perkins were you aware that we were only "efficient"? Were you aware that you were putting your children in harms way by letting them attend our schools? I wasn't. If so, why are we letting any child step foot in those buildings? Why are we letting anyone in those buildings?

Also, hang tough, Bherrle. It will all work out in the end. Never lose your passion or drive!!!

Strong Schools ...


Your comments are becoming harsh and very personal for some people. When our school building were built they were filled with asbestos. Now that we are more educated, we know that asbestos causes mesothelioma. Some of the men that have worked on our buildings and other structures throughout their career have died. I know this for a fact because I know two families who have had a loved one pass due to this horrible cancer. Please be a little more aware before you make these harsh comments.

Some of the tiles in the schools have been replaced to keep the asbestos from being exposed. Also, the ceilings have had work done on them to contain the asbestos. These "quick fixes" only last for so long and we need to make sure that we take care of our schools as a community. I am sure you take care of your home and make sure it is safe and healthy for your family. what is the difference with the schools?

We send our children to school each day because we know they are going to get a great education form amazing educators. This district does prepare our children for the 21st century.

Support our students!


Harsh is an understatement when it comes to the seriousness of what I am stating. I truly believe what you are saying, as well. It hits home for all of us. I'm just agreeing with Dr. Gunner that if the schools are an immediate health risk to everyone involved, they should be torn down immediately! As a Superintendent and Board, why stray from this all too important message. If we are at risk, destroy the old and build new immediately. Or is it safe enough until we pass a levy? I'm confused with their message but feel yours.



Someone about a week ago commented that you live in the district, but send (or sent) your kids to St. Mary's. Is that true?


It was eriemom, and I actually thought she was talking about you. We discussed this. Not sure who she was referencing regarding that statement. I'm sure she'll be more than willing to clarify it, though. She's good!


From February 6, 2013??? Only five months ago. I still don't understand how this district got this far into the building project not knowing how bad our districts financial health really was in.

They're actually talking about the security buzzers on the doors of the new school. But now five short months later, they're literally showing teachers the door! Come on people! Who do you think you're fooling?


Q: The State promises that if we build (a new 7-12 building) now, we will get credit in the future for our costs--No Guarantees--what if they renege like the state did on the reimbursements (to schools) for personal property tax credits we lost?

A: Absolutely positive that the funding promise for the new 7-12 building is available at this time. We would be able to receive this estimated $7+ million dollars as soon as July 2013 for the construction of the 7-12 facility. By qualifying for the “Exceptional Needs” program, we move to the top of the list for funding. We are awarded our funding before every other school. Future funding to help replace other buildings in the district is uncertain. While it is promised as part of the charge of the Facility program, future state funding is always uncertain.


Q: What kind of security would be in the new building? Cameras? Entrance Ways? Metal Detectors?

A: The Board of Education is designing the new building with security as an uppermost concern. There will be significantly less entrances into and out of the new building compared to the current high school. Two main entrances will be used in the morning and afternoon for student arrival and departure. Both entrances will have a double entrance “buzzer” system to enter. Guest must push a button to let the receptionist know someone is present. The receptionist will “buzz” the guest into an enclosed foyer. A second “buzz” entry will be required to pass through the foyer area into either the office or main building. At the main entrance used throughout the day will be a security office for our School Resource Officers to have a presence in this immediate area.
Security cameras will cover all entry/exit doors, the student and staff parking lot, and all interior corridors of the building as well. The building is designed with no dead end hallways to prevent inaccessible areas where someone might hide. There are no plans for metal detectors at the present time.


Our buildings are a security nightmare. Wings were built on as the population grew and each has exits. Some lead to trailer classrooms where students exit and enter all day. I wonder if we followed donut's idea if we would end up with the same type of inefficient building design.


Q: Why are we starting the Campaign levy so late?

A: The Board needed to work through the promise to the community of thoroughly investigating both renovation versus new buildings as promised to the community after the November 2010 levy defeat. It was only recently that the final consultant’s report arrived verifying the need, once again, to replace the existing facility with a new building.




People should see this as on opportunity to return to the Sandusky school system or open enroll into Sandusky. You're not going to pay to play or sing or act. And, contrary to popular belief, you can get an EXCELLENT education at Sandusky.


Go to and read the notes for the special meeting on 3-6-2013.

I'm not satisfied with Gunner's response, but finally people are asking about the district's "Effective" rating.

Also, the prospect of an academy model/facility with "Blended Learning" combining traditional instruction with technology instruction is also addressed. Given the declines in academic standing under this administration's leadership, I've got concerns about this.


Go to Perkins, you may get Mesothelioma ? Really? Comparing this to Clyde?

Board meeting minutes:

Ann Wells, a senior in the District, said she lives in a single parent home and her Mom is living on a teacher’s salary. The family cannot afford to have three teenage children and pay an additional $20 a month. She questions why a family needs to pay more money for a school building that the community does not need. Mr. Gunner replied that the $20 extra a month is for comprehensive plans that address both the operational needs and the facilities needs of the District. He said that she may think the building is OK, but it is not.

People in Clyde thought Clyde was OK, and now what are they finding out. He said he does not want to be the superintendent 20 years later that knew about all of the massive asbestos in the building and did nothing about it. He does not want to see people suffering from mesothelioma because the Board did not address a hazard in the building.

Vote Informed

Despite what you may think, the new building plans ARE on hold. This levy is to generate funds for the school for the lack of state funding. I agree with Dr. Gunner, and being at the high school for the board meetings and looking at the school, you can immediately tell its a health hazard. But despite what other users might be telling others, this levy is NOT for a new building. If you have any further questions, you can ask the board at


If there is any threat that these children, teachers, staff and public could even remotely get sick from being in those schools, why are we still using them?


In response to your question "If there is an immediate threat that these children, teachers, staff and public could even remotely get sick from being in those schools, why are we still using them?"

You repeatedly reference cancer, and I believe are characterizing Dr. Gunner's comments out of context on this issue as "immediate". The risks are serious for sure. I'm not an expert on this at all, hopefully someone who knows more on the issue to speak more on it. Chronic exposure to asbestos is a known health risk. Has been known for over 30 years now. Undisturbed (contained) asbestos is not an every day health risk in itself, but as the materials that the asbestos is contained in (ceilings, insulation, etc) age, risk increases that the asbestos can be released into the air slowly. If a piece of ceiling starts to separate or cracks. If asbestos containing floor tile comes apart, or as asbestos containing insulation (usually used around water pipes) ages and separates, same threat. This poses a health risk to anyone in the building, past or present. Which is one of the reasons why since 2010 the school board and Supt. have supported and recommended plans to do exactly what you say in another post - Tear them down and build new ones. This is only one reason, but an important one, why Dr. Gunner, the board, the state facilities commission, and two 25 person committees (represented by the community) have recommended buiding new for some time now. I have not spoken to Dr. Gunner specifically on this issue, and I have not read or heard in full context what his comments were, but even outside of full context I can say he is correct, at least as far as the chronic exposure and long-term health concerns.

I would also add the performing renovations on buildings containing asbestos vs. not containing is much higher risk, and requires specially trained personnel and equipment. It is much more expensive than normal renovation, which is a reason why the projected renovation costs of the high school building alone exceeded 80% of tearing down and building a new, modern educational facility.

Why hasn't that happened you ask? There is not one single reason, but a combination of things. State funding continues to decrease. Did you know that Perkins receives less money (actual dollars) from the state in 2013 than it did in 2002? I didn't till yesterday. HB 920 is antiquated - while it importantly protects farmers from rapidly rising taxes on their land, it is destructive to overall school funding. Some balance needs to be struck there, that protects farmers, but also funds the schools in a more progressive manner. I don't mean take more money from the farmers. But no state congressman seems willing to take on the issue, for fear of political suicide. Other factors include starting in 2010, the voting public chose to "vote no" to a levy that would have been more than matched with Federal interest free loans, specified for captial use. That was the "once in a lifetime opportunity", to address the facility concerns now and far into the future with the significant help of Federal interest free loans. Had that levy passed, the districts financial situation would have been solidified well into the future. The district still needs to address facility concerns (as you have agreed above) now and far into the future, but the Federal interest free loans are gone. The public feels cheated because millage was moved from outside to inside. While that move advanced the schools cash flow problems by a year or two, long term it will generate much more revenue and reduce if not eliminate the need for future levies. Plus, that money is not gone, it is simply set aside to be used for PI needs. However, by law, it cannot be simply "moved back." The explanation to all this one is pretty long and complicated, I won't attempt it on a blog. But I'd be glad to meet with anyone in person to explain it. So would Dr. Gunner. A second levy attempt failed in May 2013. Overall, only one additional funds levy, 2.9 mills, has been passed in 18 years.


So how long do you forecast until we need a new school to ensure the safety of everyone involved. August? November?



In response to your question "So how long do you forecast until we need a new school to ensure the safety of everyone involved. August? November?"

I am not qualified to give that answer. I would recommend you viewing the facility reports that are avaulable on the Perkins Local Schools website, and/or contact the firms that have inspected the districts buildings.


I don't think he's taking Gunner's comments out context. Gunner referenced "Clyde" which a known cancer cluster in the area of an unknown origin.



You are correct, Clyde is an area of know cancer cluster. From years worth of repeated exposure to "something" toxic. The focus latley seems to be related to testing ground/waters where Whirlpool used to dump waste. I'm not saying that is the cause, that is just the latest I've seen. But Clyde is a classic case of chornic exposure leading to deadly disease.

The Health issue in our school buildings is just one facet of why either extensive renovation or new buildings are needed, but it is an important one. Long-term exposure to asbestos can be harmful. Asbestos has been outlawed in building materials since I believe 1984-85. The longer the asbestos remains in the buildings, the greater chance that those in the building are being exposed to it. Ours is not the only school, or building for that matter, in the state or country that has asbestos in it. But you will find that eventually, everyone who is responsible for a buidling with asbestos in it will tell you that they would like to either get the asbestos out, or tear down and building new.


Brad - you asked why 15th mentioned cancer. I'm suggesting that it wasn't !5 who brought that up. It was Gunner at that meeting and I think it is a way to incite fear.


Only "Effective"? When did this change? It's ok though. Just an "oversimplification". Gunner has a twisted answer for everything.....just ask him.

Mr. Kuiesza then indicated that he is not happy with the “Effective” rating. He said the District should be “Excellent with Distinction”. He said that rating is telling him that the students are not getting the best education. Mr. Gunner said that is an oversimplification of what the rating details. He said that he and the Board are not happy with the rating, and the Administration and Staff are working very hard to get our students’ scores higher. To do that, the District needs all programs in place and not to dismantle the programs.

44870 South

If this whole thing were a good idea, there wouldn't be almost 1,000 comments about it. Perkins residents, the answer is staring you straight in the face - VOTE NO. And don't be so naive to think they aren't going to be asking for even MORE in the near future. Hopefully when they do though, it will be under new leadership and not on the heels of embarrassing and irresponsible fiscal decisions made by these clowns running the show. My mind is made up on this issue..VOTE NO. Your children will thrive in whatever school district you send them. WHY? Because the vast majority of us are GOOD parents, and that is the key to our childrens' success. Show your children what it means to stand up and maintain your convictions. There's only so much money - and that goes for everybody...I can take the extra 60 bucks a month this is going to cost me and put it into my kids college savings...not give it to a bunch of people who are going to waste it under the guise of "saving the children"...They are doing just the opposite, setting our children up to have to pay for this mess!

Strong Schools ...

Good parents do not jeopardize their child's education. Our children will have a harder time going to college if they do not get the opportunity to excel in academics, athletics, and the arts. All of these components prepare our children for the real world and the future. Scholarships are hard to come by without these opportunities.

Our money will not be wasted when this levy passes. The district will be able to afford the regular operational expenses.


No, we just jeopardize their health and well being until we finally get a levy passed??? Do the buildings need to come down immediately or not? Which is it? Can someone answer this for me, please?

Don't get me wrong, Strong Schools. I hear you, but this is so unbelievably twisted that it's hard for anyone to make any sense out of this campaign. Even you have to agree with that.



In response to your post: "No, we just jeopardize their health and well being until we finally get a levy passed??? Do the buildings need to come down immediately or not? Which is it? Can someone answer this for me, please? Don't get me wrong, Strong Schools. I hear you, but this is so unbelievably twisted that it's hard for anyone to make any sense out of this campaign. Even you have to agree with that."

My answer would be that two 25 person community represented committees, at least one independent inspection firm, the District Superintendent, and the Board of Education have all been saying since 2009-2010 that new buidlings were needed. The sooner the better, see my previous post to Underthebridge on this issue.

I'd like to understand better what "is so unbelievably twisted" about this campaign? I'm not being smart, I genuinely want to here your perspective.

44870 South

Don't you dare suggest that parents who don't vote for this levy are jeopardizing their children's education. That is insulting...We HAVE other choices! Perkins is not some utopia and the only place my children can get a quality education. Now my children can't get scholarships unless they go through the Perkins School System? They better get a full-ride then considering the hefty price tag getting educated there comes with..."The district will be able to afford the regular operational expenses"....PLEASE...the district would have been able to afford these "regular operational expenses" hadn't they moved millions of dollars. Once again, please explain why a multi-million dollar athletic complex was built when we needed the money for all of these "regular operations"??? PLEASE EXPLAIN!


South - it's already been explained, numerous times. The answers to the stadium, the answers to the millage move. You obviously disagree with those explanations, and that's OK. You will vote no, and that's OK too. I'd be glad to call you on election day to remind you to go vote. I do not believe the previous post was meant to indicate that "your children can't get scholarships unless they go through the Perkins School System." My take on what was meant is that we want Perkins to remain on the cutting edge of the educational spectrum. Not doing so will make it more difficult for all graduates of Perkins. I forget who posted that, but poster, please correct me if I am wrong in what you meant.

As far as a hefty price tag, I would encourage you to take another look at that too. Perkins school district has consistently spent less per student than most schools in Erie County (all but one I believe) and less than the state average also. In 2011, Perkins spent $9,996 dollars per student, while the state average was $10,696. A full seven hundred dollars per student less. The school (I don't know which school it was) that spent less than Perkins was at $9,403. Perkins is being responsible with taxpayer money. I understand that some don't agree with the stadium, some don't agree with the millage move, some don't agree with the need for new facilities, etc. That's ok. But the officials that were elected to be responsible for the district feel otherwise. That's not being smug. It's doing what they feel is right. On the flip side of the coin, there would be a whole group of people scraming at them to build new facilities if they were against it. Either way, they get the criticism.

44870 South

Well Bherrle, I guess "the officials" got it wrong didn't they??? Because there's pushing a thousand comments on this issue...."It's doing what they feel is right"....You don't make decisions based on FEELINGS! You make decisions based on ADDITION! They apparently couldn't add when they layed the first brick...and you want me to trust they will be better at adding in the future??? C'mon!



The number of comments to me means nothing. There are both for and against comments being made repeatedly by the same group of people. I'd estimate that they are 2% or less of all total potential voters blogging here.

You are twisting my words now. So, let's replace "feel is right" with "know has to be done", or "what should be done." I'm not suggesting emotion be involved in these decisions at all. Saying the problem is about "addition" is oversimplifying a very complex problem, in my opinion.

I don't want you do to anything specific other than to make sure you are fully informed. I'm not suggesting you aren't, this goes for yes supporters too. Like I said to Gadfly, I'll gladly call you and remind you to vote on election day. Even if you call me the day before and say "Brad, I'm still voting no." I believe they can be trusted, and that they are making good decisions, and I'll continue to try to report the facts. You have the right to disagree with me, and vice-versa.

Vote Informed

South- How can you even say that a no vote isn't jeopardizing our children's education? First off, if the levy fails, 14 teachers will loose their jobs. Also, if this levy fails, the Pay to Play fees will increase which will result in less students involved in extra curricular activities. Colleges want students who are well rounded, and that involves extra curriculars. You're jeopardizing the quality of our phys ed, music, and art programs because if this levy fails, the classroom teachers will have to teach them, not the teachers who specialize in that area. A yes vote is the clear answer here. And a no vote will only punish our children, the future of this community.

44870 South

And....therefore, based on the fact that the board of education and its fearless leader has jeopardized our children's education, we all as parents have the right to send our children elsewhere...don't put this burden on the parents, and those of us who disagree with what they have done. This is all the fault of the current leadership. A NO vote is not a vote against the kids or teachers...its a statement that says "we disagree with your leadership and the tactics you have used"...unfortunately until this current regime is dismantled, there will be some suffering and sacrifices along the way...

Vote Informed

My children are extremely worried about this levy. If this levy fails, the entire school system and community will be affected. My kids won't be able to participate in all of their activities. And not punishing the teachers?! 14 teachers will loose their jobs, and you don't consider that a punishment from the no voters? If you don't like the leadership, then vote them out! And even if you enroll your kids into another school, your property value will go down. And that's a fact. Vote YES for the students and teachers!



Yes, you have the right to send your children elsewhere, and if you feel that is what in their best interest, then I encourage you to do just that. That is your decision.

I disagree about tactics. I don't see tactics being used at all. I see the board and super being very open with information. In my opinion, a "NO VOTE" on the levy because you want the board and super removed is a mis-guided vote. You are hurting the students and teachers, to send a message to the board, in my opinion, when instead you could simply vote two of them out in November, if you chooe to do so. That allows you to vote on the levy based on it's own merits, and if your vote on the levy is still "no", then that's OK.


This levy situation is about one thing to those of us who believe in America and the values of our country.

The right to vote.

With the present manipulation of millage by the superintendent and school board the present and future citizens will abdicate their right to vote on buildings.

What is your vote worth? Are you willing to give that right up to pass this levy?

Until the millage is returned, to its voted on use, this question will be a issue in the Perkins district.

This levy is not about money. It's about your rights and if they have any value to you.

Do they?



I respectfully disagree. There was nothing illegal, unethical, or immorral about the millage move. The state gives that right soley to the board of education of each district, and it also denies the public a vote on that issue. The taxpayers do get to vote on outside millage, which they have repeatedly voted no to providing any additional funds.

I understand that you want a vote on that issue, and you want a vote on the building issue (whether one gets built), and that you and others feel that is a right the taxpayers should have. I again respectfully disagree. We elect the people who make those decisions. Not unlike many issues decided at the state or national level. If I want a specific vote on those issues, then I'll run for the board.

Aside from that, the millage move, while creating a cash issue a year or two earlier than would have happened, will save the district (thus the taxpayers) money for years to come.

Our right to vote is preserved in that board members come up for re-election every four years.

sandtown alum

I hate to say it this way but welcome to the real world Perkins Schools! School districts all over Ohio have been dealing with these budget cuts from the State. People don't truly understand how tax dollars flow from the State and therefore don't understand that the money just isn't there anymore. If you make $30k a year and your salary is cut by $5k, will you still give your kids money to go to CP or the movies or Goofy Golf? Probably not, unless you use credit to live the same lifestyle you were living before the reduction. Schools are no different. The money isn't there and there has to be cuts. It is the schools responsiblity to provide an education. If the BOE has to decide between $ for sports or keeping a classroom, what should they chose? Our school district closed several elementary schools, laid off many really good teachers and added the play to pay. Our classrooms went from 20-25 students to 30+. It's been a very rough transition but we did it because we didn't have a choice!! I know that our school district did everything they could to run a tight ship, they never had the opportunity to have wasteful spending. Perkins residents need to get educated and not blame all the people in the administration. Do you really think they want to be the ones to deliver this bad news and actually make the cuts? They have the weight of the entire school district on them, I can't believe they take that responsibilty lightly. I don't know what's best for your school district but the reality of budget cuts is here and there can be substantial changes coming down the pike, get informed and do what's best for the students!


Perkins Local Schools loses it's "excellence with distinction" rating and has been downgraded to "effective". Why? How and when did this happen?


Pride, Tradition, Efficient!

Vote Informed

Sooner or later we'll pass a levy. But for how much? If this levy fails, not only will we loose 14 teachers and have skyrocketed Pay to Play fees, but we will STILL be in debt, which will mean another levy will be proposed. There's only one way out, and that's to pass this levy. Like I said, we'll pass one sooner or later. And this levy is NOT for a new school. It's for school funds. The Board isn't afraid of your questions! They will answer them and even post them to the public at I will be voting YES because I believe in strong school systems! I will support our students and our teachers!


"And this levy is NOT for a new school. It's for school funds."

That is patently false.

The only reason Perkins Schools is, allegedly, in such a dire financial situation that Gunner is about to "dismantle the district" is because he and the Board chose to move millions of dollars from operating funds to a fund to build new facilities.

Gunner recently took on a $3,000,000 loan from Citizens Bank to design and plan a new high school and junior high building.

As soon as this levy passes, construction will begin.

This is a building levy. I cannot make it any simpler for you.

Vote Informed

I attached a link because I figured someone would find something negative to say about my posting, and if you happened to click the link, you would have found that someone directly asked the board what you seem to think is true:

If the levy passes in August, will any of that money be used for new facilities or building renovations?


No. This is a general operating levy for the day-to-day operations of the school district. This money will be used for salaries, benefits, supplies and materials to operate the school daily. The Board previously has set aside the 5.2 mils of “Inside Millage” to be used for facility renovation or construction. The Board intends on using the “Inside Millage” funds to address school facility needs sometime in the future. At this time, any building project has been placed on hold until we can stabilize the day-to-day operations of the district.

Citizen, I encourage you to stop spreading false information. This levy is not for the new buildings.

Edwin Ison

What does stabilize the day to day operations mean and how does the district
secure such?


For those asking about the district's ranking, I encourage you to go to and search school report cards. If you go to the link "view all local report cards" you will be able to look up report cards for the district as well as the individual buildings from previos years. You will notice the year we scored excellent that we actually met less indicators from when we were ranked effective. There is something called value added that played a part in this. You can read more about value added on the report card. There are many factors that contribute to a district's ranking.

Pirate Mom would be great if people did that, but they won't. YOU know that the bar keeps changing but most on here don't want or need to know. The excuses made change with facts presented by levy supporters. Hopefully the few that really want to know will read your post. The others will just say you're "drinking Gunners KoolAid". Vote yes on August 6!!!!

Vote Informed

I'm with Pirate Mom! VOTE YES!


Here is the more direct link to the report cards for Perkins from the Ohio Department of Education.


Here is a brief explanation of the Value-Added Measure.

Here is a brief overview of how Perkins has faired on the ODE District Report cards from the previous ODE link.


08-09 Effectiive
09-10 Excellent
10-11 Effective
11-12 Effective


08-09 Effective
09-10 Excellent w/Distinction
10-11 Effective
11-12 Effective


08-09 Excellent
09-10 Effective
10-11 Effective
11-12 Effective


08-09 Excellent
09-10 Excellent
10-11 Excellent
11-12 Excellent

District (with additional years)

03-04 Effective (Buccieri)
04-05 Effective
05-06 Continuous Improvement
06-07 Continuous Improvement
07-08 Effective (Rechtenwald/Gunner)
08-09 Effective
09-10 Excellent
10-11 Effective
11-12 Effective

Perkins seemed to decline significantly with the administration of Buccieri, the strike, etc. Things that have changed over the years include, among other things, the Curriculum Directors.


They honestly need to drop the 'mil' specification that most people don't understand. The proposed levy would cost the owner of a 100 thousand dollar home less than $35 per month. That's less than most of those home owners spend per week on coffee on their way to and from work. That's not much to ask for to insure the future and safety of this community and our children.

On top of that, the reason the homes in Columbus Park, Fairview Lanes, and around Douglas Dr / Michigan Ave are all valued over 75 thousand is the school district. Truth be told, there isn't a house in any of those areas truly worth 75k... more like 40k, but because of the district, they are over valued by upwards of 30k. You can buy a palace in Sandusky proper for 75k because nobody wants to live there. no, again, just don't come crying when you can't get a home equity loan to put a back porch on your house or a fence around your yard, or remodel your kitchen because your house has lost 30k in value over the next 5 years. All to save $35 per month (on a 100k home).


Not sure what side of the debate these links will help out, but it gives information about the school district's expenditures and revenue http://public-school-districts.f... and then a page where the school board discusses the 3.5 million dollar loan for the new building (at the bottom of the page) .


That meeting was on December 12, 2012. Executive session to discuss litigation and staff assignment. I'm sure that the board, taking advise from the super, felt confident about their decisions. That is, until February or March, when the District Court (federal) reversed and remanded in favor of the school employee.

This district has a problem with the term "just". For some reason they think that they can manufacture "cause" with impunity.


Did You Know?

In the 2012-13 School Year, Perkins spent $9,836 per student, which was less than Perkins spent 5 years ago, and is $1,800 dollars per year, per student, under the statewide average.

Edwin Ison

When and how will "financial stability" be reached and maintained?

If this new levy is passed, it will only be to tread water, according to gunner.

So, either gunner is lying, and this levy is for a building and construction will soon follow.

Or more levy and money requests will be needed to build.

Which is it?

What exactly is "financial stability" and how will it be reached?

Surprised some levy yes man hasn't been instructed on how to answer this question considering how important this issue is.


So refreshing to see so many people in the coomunity come together to support Perkins schools. I have seen with my own eyes a huge amount of people who will say Yes! Such a great thing...keep up the great work Proud Pirates!