‘Needs will change’

Dear Editor,
I have been asked by several people what my thoughts are regarding the proposed school bond.
I would not recommend providing $76 million of other people’s money all in one shot, to any local organization in a commitment that lasts 30 years.
Priorities will change, needs will change, but the money will be already spent. I don’t have a crystal ball to see that far into the future and I don’t think the school leadership does either. We will be basically leveraging the financial future of not only our children but also our grandchildren.
If there is a need for investment in our schools, I recommend approving smaller, itemized proposals, so those people whose money is being spent can be assured of exactly what they’re paying for.
Joan Patterson
Independence Township

Support for bond

Dear Editor,
I’m writing in support of the Clarkston Community Schools’ bond proposal on the Aug. 2 ballot. As a parent in the Clarkston School district and an educator in Lake Orion, I choose to send my kids to Clarkston Community Schools. I’ve made this choice because I believe in the quality education students receive in this district. But our district is in need of many upgrades.
I believe the proposed improvements in technology to be first and foremost. I travel to many districts in Oakland County and Clarkston’s technology is extremely outdated. I see the struggle this presents for our students who are working very hard in a highly competitive academic world but don’t have the tools to compete.
Citizens need to understand this bond, by law, can’t be used for teacher salaries. The benefits of this bond in my mind out weigh the impact of extending repayment for approximately 16 years to capture the funds necessary to bring our technology into the 21st century.
The proposal extends our current 7 mils and is not an increase of our current rate. This world of increased technology is that of which we live in. We need to provide high quality education for our children equal to today’s world. We need to give our students the platform to compete with students from surrounding districts. It’s imperative to maintain strong schools and furthermore a strong Clarkston community. I ask that you vote Yes on Tuesday, Aug. 2.
Derek Mazur
Independence Township

Vote would fix funding

Dear Editor,
As a parent of two children in Clarkston Schools, and as a transplant from Virginia, I write in support of the Aug. 2 bond proposal.
I have learned this proposal extends out approximately 16 years our current 7 mil debt to capture about $75 million. This will provide improvements to safety and security, facility and site improvements, and educational technology. These improvements will benefit needs for all students and it seems like a win win for our schools and our community as a whole.
Since living in Michigan, I feel the school funding laws in this state need to be addressed. State per pupil funding for Clarkston is the fourth lowest in the 28 districts in Oakland County! This lower level of funding compounded over the years has left Clarkston with major capital needs that can not be addressed by yearly budget allocations.
However, I am very pleased with the fiscal responsibility Clarkston has shown in managing their budget and while managing to increase their fund balance so as not to have to borrow cash to make payroll. Through good stewardship of our tax dollars, Clarkston has raised the bar on rigor for all students while continuing to grow programs and choice for our students.
Anna Muzzy
Independence Township

Bond win-win, reader says

Dear Editor,
The schools near your home affect the value of your home, ask any realtor or person searching for a new home. My husband and I have been homeowners in the Clarkston School District for 25 years and do not have any children, but you better believe this bond proposal on Aug. 2 affects us.
The first question people ask when looking to buy a new home is, “What is the school district like?”
The competitiveness and appearance of our schools has a large affect on our home values. This bond aims to upgrade systems in schools buildings such as roofs, boilers and parking lots; increase safety; and provide students with more technology so they are ready for the demands of today’s colleges and work places.
At first, I was concerned when I heard the district was going to be asking for more money. I did my research and discovered tax rates will not be increased. I also found out over 6o percent of this money will be used for safety and security, extending the useful life of equipment; and increasing operational efficiency.
It’s a win-win for residents and schools. Join me in voting Yes on Aug. 2.
Joan Badalucco
Davisburg

Too many expenses

Dear Editor,
Dr. Rock’s initiative to put the district into an additional $76 million debt, on top of the current $130.9 million debt, is being made to look like it won’t cost taxpayers any more than they are already paying because the millage rate will remain the same.
That is true, but they didn’t happen to say how many more years this bond request would extend the current debt. Based on the current bond debt, the majority of it will be paid off within seven years, and the balance will be paid off within 13 years.
If this new bond proposal is passed, it would delay the payoff of the district’s current outstanding bonds and the new $76 million bonds to 2045, 29 years from now.
In reality, this new bond will still be collected from property owners for items long past their useful lives. This is like financing a four year old used car for 10 years. It might be cheaper than financing for a reasonable time, but by the time the car is no longer running, you may still owe thousands of dollars, your car will be worth nothing, and you will still have to pay the payment to the bank.
Repair and maintenance expenses are not legally allowed to be included in bond expenses. Many of the school parking lots are in need of repair/recoating which is a maintenance expense.
The district doesn’t want to have to pay for the paving expenses out of operating funds, so the district has plans in the bond proposal to add some parking spaces, in some cases very few parking spaces, and “realign” bus and parent drop-off areas for “safety,” a category that can be paid for out of bond funds.
In reality, the “realignment” of the parking/drop-off areas is all to get the parking lots repaved through the bond. I do not see that there are any real safety issues related to the drop off areas.
There may be some “self-important” or “clueless” parent problems in the parent drop-off areas the school administration is not willing to address, but the real issue is the district wants to repave the parking lots out of bond funds instead of operational funds.
The information reported by Trevor Keiser in his article in the July 1 Clarkston News on proposed spending at CHS stated, “according to the budget, the secure entry addition would cost $228,000.”
However, the critical needs document on the district website says it is $600,000 for the secure entry addition at the high school, so which is it? Trevor was also told, “the bond proposal includes a new high school roof.” However, the official proposal for the things covered by the bond provided to the school board did not include the replacement of the roof on the high school.
This whole bond request is in so much flux, the district doesn’t even know what they want covered by it.
The district wants to spend $8 million, an average of $666,000 per building, to build a “Secure Entry Addition / Secure Front Entrance” to the front of each school in the district. Are you kidding me? The schools already have security systems and protocols in place at the front entrances. I have no idea why they are asking for this.
The district does not need additional sports fields at the high school. The recently proposed stadium for lacrosse and soccer had its name changed to “multi-purpose field and seating with scoreboard for use by marching band and athletics” after people disputed the need for a lacrosse stadium, but we still don’t need it.
I wonder if this would have been put on the bond proposal if two current board members didn’t have kids playing lacrosse. We also do not have a critical need for improvements to the sports fields, or a $170,000 baseball press box, yet they still intend to spend $1,890,000 on such unneeded items.
This is another example of Dr. Rock’s attempt to further his political agenda and gain power by ramping up his “Cultures of Thinking” and “Project Zero” untested educational theories/programs by “stealing” from the future borrowing opportunity of the district.
There are enough glittering generalities, changed descriptions, amount changes, and woefully under-defined items in the proposal information for Dr. Rock to spend the bond money however he wants, especially since he has 5-2 control over his rubber stamp school board.
I do not doubt that the district needs bond funds in order to do some of the items Dr. Rock has identified as “critical”, but the district would be better to ask for less money for reasonable expenses and for the bond to be paid off over 15-20 years instead of 29 or 30 years. No surprise, just another crock from Dr. Rock. Please vote “No” on the $76 million CCS bond proposal on Aug. 2.
Dawn Schaller
Independence Township

Support from residents

Dear Editor,
On Tuesday, Aug. 2,, Clarkston Community Schools will ask their community to support an extension of the existing 7 mil bond debt for district-wide improvements to address identified and ongoing facilities, safety and technology needs benefiting all students.
We are a group of concerned citizens working to inform our community of this bond and the benefits of its passage. We believe the board of education and administration have developed a comprehensive plan that addresses aging infrastructure and capital needs through an extensive seven month review of the district facilities and through community input.
This group is organized under the name “ClarkstonYES8.2.” We believe “Strong Schools equals Strong Community.”
Under the leadership of Phil Bertolini, Paul Carpentier, and Mary Herzenstiel, ClarkstonYES8.2 is available for speaking engagements at your neighbor association meetings, parent group and boosters.
It is estimated, based on a conservative financial evaluation of property value trends over the prior six years, as required by state treasury, this request will extend the current bond debt out an additional 16 years with no increase of the current rate to capture approximately $75 million.
State requirements during preliminary Treasury approval require this proposal must provide for repayment of technology within five years and infrastructure in seven so as not to exceed their useful life. This proposal does not provided for a device for each and every student.
You can review our information on our Facebook page at ClarkstonYes8.2. If you have any questions you can contact us at: ClarkstonYES8.2@gmail.com, Twitter: @ClarkstonYES, Instagram: ClarkstonYES8.2. We ask that you vote Yes on Tuesday, Aug. 2.
Phil Bertolini – Independence Township
Paul Carpentier – Springfield Township
Mary Herzenstiel – Springfield Township

Thanks for 4th help

Dear Editor,
We celebrated our Sixth Annual Independence Fest Veterans Celebration in Clintonwood Park on Monday, July 4. We showcased our Military Museum in Bartsch Hall in our Senior Community Center. We had displays this year from the Revolutionary War through our most recent war in Afghanistan.
I want to thank all of the veterans who brought their personal items to display in our museum between 11 a.m. until 3 p.m. It was great to be able to visit with our veterans and the organizations that work with them.
The weather was perfect for us to honor all of our veterans who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. Special thanks to our Planning and Organizing Committee members, Bart Clark, Gordy Cloutier, Phil Custodio, Edward and Martha Henderson, Amy Laboissonniere, Mary Melega, Peg Roth, and Lois Seddon.
We opened this year’s ceremony with the Flag Raising, Moment of Silence, 21 Gun Salute, and Taps, performed by Don Cremer and the American Legion Chief Pontiac Post 377 Honor Guard.
Our opening entertainment was the Barbershop Quartet 4GVN and in the afternoon the Rick Leider Trio performed on stage in front of the Center.
This year’s lunch was graciously provided again by Sportsmen’s Great Northern Grill. They provided a special pulled pork lunch for all of the veterans and their families that were registered. Special thanks to all of our bakers who treated our veterans with homemade desserts. Without all of our staff and our volunteers Sandy Bailey, Pam Marin, Pat McLaughlin, Jeanne Messing, Carolyn Morrison, Sophia Nakis, Sue Shubert and Dan Swope, that day we would not have been able to have such a successful event.
Piper MacConaghy, third grader and daughter of a United States veteran, Brian from the Afghanistan War, sang our National Anthem. Bart Clark, captain U.S. Navy retired, did a wonderful job recognizing all of our veterans at this year’s event. Special thanks to Phil Custodio, Desert Storm veteran, for leading us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Independence Township Supervisor Patrick Kittle read a special proclamation in commemoration of active duty military personnel that was signed by our Independence Township Board.
Thanks to all our special sponsors this year: Platinum Level sponsor, Sportsmen’s Great Northern Grill who provided lunch, Silver Level sponsors American Legion Auxiliary Campbell-Richmond Unit 63, Ron Wagner and The Frusciano Agency;Equis Financial, Bronze sponsors All Saint’s Cemetery and The Preserve, Lockwood of Waterford and the Bart Clark Family. Our Event Support this year was from American Legion Chief Pontiac Post 377, Sons of the American Legion Squadron 63, Coats Funeral Home, Pat Kittle, Lewis E. Wint and Son Funeral Home, Visiting Angels, and The Clarkston News.
Without all of the support of everyone listed above we would not have been able to recognize our veterans in the way they deserve.
I am grateful to everyone for their support and making our 6th Annual Veterans Celebration a huge success.
Barbara Rollin, senior division supervisor, Independence Township Parks, Recreation & Seniors