Politics Extra: CPS, endorsers, rally on Issue 10

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

CPS, endorsers, rally on Issue 10

Backers of the Cincinnati Public Schools tax hike rallied on the indoor steps of City Hall this morning, a few hours before City Council was scheduled to approve a resolution endorsing the levy.

CPS Superintendent Rosa Blackwell promised victory next Tuesday.

"We will win," she said.

If she's right, it would be a remarkable turnaround in public sentiment. Just four months ago, voters defeated the levy by nearly a 3-to-2 margin. But levy supporters are encouraged by a much more active campaign and what they hope will be collateral support brought in by a hotly contested Democratic primary for president.

Included in the roughly 65 supporters on Wednesday were a series of high-profile endorsers of the tax levy, including City Council members David Crowley, Roxanne Qualls, John Cranley and Laketa Cole.

Also present were senior officials from organized labor, religious groups and the Charter Committee, which backed the tax hike last week.

Shortly before the rally began, Mayor Mark Mallory -- who has stayed silent on the CPS levy -- walked through the levy group, heavily populated by his fellow Democrats, on his way to his office. A pro-levy campaign organizer acknowledged his absence didn't look good.

Mallory spokesman Jason Barron said Mallory has a longstanding practice of not attending lunchtime press conferences.

Away from the rally, COAST member Paul Naberhaus responded to Blackwell's promise of victory. "All I can say is, I hope not. I hope that the voters realize that this tax, if it's enacted, is big, and it reduces their property values."

Some quotes from the event:

"Faith only lives in an educated gentry, and that's what we're hoping for." -the Rev. Richard Bollman, the AMOS Project.

"It's a must that this issue passes. There is a lot going on in the world behind me today, and we need our young people to be prepared to participate in the world economy." -- the Rev. James Pankey, president, Baptist Ministers Conference

"The fact is, we cannot grow the city without a top-notch school system." -Cranley

50 Comments:

at 2:33 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

How much does it cost to run this levy every 3 or 4 months? What has changed in this short time frame?
I haven't got a salary increase, the sale price of my house has gone down and I can hardly pay for gas to get to and from work.
When will CPS learn to live within their means? How many voters don't own property and don't have any financial consequences in this boondoggle?

at 2:39 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

CPS is a bottomless pit. Their results are abysmal and they have fewer students to educate. Why yet another levy?

at 2:43 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

John Cranley--- The city is NOT growing. You are forcing people out by these repetitive tax increases on the blue collar workers. Enough.

at 3:07 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

If this levy passes, I won't be able to send my children to private school. When that happens every private school should shift their students to CPS. The private schools could then rent their facilities to CPS to handle the huge influx.
By the way, what is AMOS and does it pay taxes?

at 3:52 PM, February 27, 2008

rpa said...

so... as someone who lives in the city (no kids yet, but would love to able to stay once i have some...) i'm supposed to give more money to these schools? why? i know that they are completely non-functional.

when discussing housing arrangements with my wife (and we currently rent in the city, but have been discussing buying a house within the boundaries of the cps) we've always factored in the cost of a private education when considering staying in the city (which we would prefer) over moving to the suburbs.

public schools in this city (and any other city of this size or larger in the u.s.a.) are broken. giving them more money will not solve the problem. we spend more per capita on primary/seconday education in the u.s.a. than anywhere else in the world, and have less to show for it.

i'm not even sure what the solution is now... i have given up on public education in cities. and i'll be voting accordingly. why pay more taxes to get the same mediocre-to-poor results?

at 4:14 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

The district is not funding the levy campaign. It is a nonprofit group that is doing the bulk of the campaigning. The schools have very strict guidelines about what the employees can and cannot do. It is mostly the parents that give the money and the support. As far as not being able to afford to send their children to private schools if the levy passes. Think about those of us who CANNOT afford private school for all our children. We have the right to a GOOD public education. And in all honesty, after teaching in both private and public schools, I'd much rather have my children in public schools so as to avoid stereotyping that happens in most of the private schools, not to mention that my children are getting a better education at a CPS school than they would have at a private school.

at 4:52 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

"...has a habit of not attending lunchtime press conferences"? What, too busy for out kids?

ZERO

at 5:23 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

CPS... poor investment for the buck. Lack of money is not the problem. How about all that leftover building fund cash that won't be used now that several schools will not be built (shrinking public school population)? "Fess up" CPS.

at 5:49 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

4:14
What planet are you from? There is little to no discipline in the public schools and the test results are poor.
If your children can get a better education in CPS than a private school, your PR people are not getting that point across to the masses.
Besides, if the education is that good, why do you need more money?
Something doesn't add up here.

at 6:00 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

Anon 4:14
It seems that your children are getting a good education by your own admission. I'm paying for your children and I'm paying for my two children to go to a Catholic school.
I notice that most public high schools have many extras that the private schools can't afford. Maybe it's belt tightening time instead of raiding our wallets?
Since you persist in running this levy so often, I'm voting no because you think you are going to wear me down.
When will you wise up? You are administration top-heavy and that's expensive.

at 6:12 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

Has there ever been a tax increase Crowley hasn't supported? We should just give all our money to him and let him decide where it goes.

at 7:59 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

We should have voted yes for the jail and no on the Cincinnati public schools, cut the middle man out.It would cost a lot less in the long run.
VOTE NO

at 9:45 PM, February 27, 2008

aa said...

I'm shocked by the ignorant comments on this site! CPS does so much good for the city of Cincinnati and does so on a very tight budget that has not increased with cost of living/inflation in nearly 8 years. How well would you be doing if you didn't get that adjustment in pay?

The districtwide gradutation rate for CPS is up to 80% for the class of 2007, up from 51% in 2000. That's HUGE! They've also pulled the district out of academic emergency and into the continuous improvement category, the middle category, on the Ohio Report Card. And the district has almost closed the academic achievement gap between African-Americans and white students.

And all the while, the district has been implementing money-saving measures to keep costs down. This includes a reduction in full time employees by 1,349 between 2003 and 2008, the closing of 24 schools since 2002 and a hiring freeze to name a few.

If you choose to vote no on issue 10, that is your right as a voter. But please get your facts straight before you pass judgement and cast that vote.

at 10:33 PM, February 27, 2008

Anonymous said...

The Voters of Cincinnati will vote NO to this levy.

at 12:23 AM, February 28, 2008

Flickster said...

For those of you complaining about your salaries and home values, realize this... CPS has not had an increase in an operating budget in 7 years. The renewal levies just made sure they didn't lose their budget. Are you still making what you made in 2000? Could you afford to live on that with increased gas prices? Increased food prices? CPS has been doing that.

at 8:26 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

I got a property tax cut by filing for the Homestead Act property tax relief. Why would I vote 'YES' and give it all back?

at 10:25 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

I would strongly suggest, that PROPERTY OWNERS take a good look at how much their property tax bill will increase if this levy is passed. We property owners should be the only ones with the ability to vote on all school levies. I recently noticed on my property tax bill, that CPS accounts for about 65% of my bill. My daughter had an apartment within the CPS limits and refused to vote on previous levy requests. She as I don't feel it is fair to property owners to pay the taxes that renters vote on. It appears as though no one is willing to stand up and question our law makers etc. to change the law and ways school tax levies are collected. Until this funding issue is addressed,RENTERS PLEASE say NO to incresed property taxes for not only CPS but all school districts within Ohio.

at 10:42 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

I posted a Pro-Levy comment yesterday and I find it interesting that it was not approved by the moderator. It was not hateful or false. I guess you either do not care or do not want an intelligent discussion on this matter and only want the Levy Bashing crowd to have a voice.

No Child Left Behind has drained the schools resources with UNFUNDED mandates. CPS is running on a budget that has not increased since before NCLB was enacted.
If you think the schools are doing so poorly and you do not want your taxes to go up I have a great idea for you: Volunteer. It costs you nothing but your time to help out your local school with tutoring. Increased test scores = more federal and state money and the less your tax money is needed.
The voucher system has left CPS losing money while unregulated charter schools get the money intended for CPS and yet they perform worse in testing.
Just a few thoughts.

at 11:03 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

The photo (on this article) shows me a group of people, holding signs, who would survive well living in Havana. Liberals, Socialists... what's the difference. Tax, tax, tax

at 11:32 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

CPS is making progress. More students are achieving more. More schools are achieving more. Graduation rates have gone way up. Achievement gaps are closing. Children are working hard, as are the adults.

All on less money every year, when inflation is factored in. They are operating on essentially the same amount of money for 8 years. The district has cut the central office and trimmed the teaching staff by 1349 jobs. But the cuts are taking a toll. And if the levy doesn't pass the cuts will be horrendous.

Children should have classes smaller than 40 students. They should have art, music, and gym classes that reinforce the academic learning in their math, science, language, and social studies classes.

No school in this district is a palace, with luxuries and extras raining down. Some schools have more than others, but all schools need more than they have presently.
And this levy will essentially do no more than keep what we've got at this point.

Please vote YES on issue 10. Stronger schools are good for our city. Stronger students are good for us all.

at 11:42 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

When you pass Withrow High School on Madison Road in Hyde Park, have you noticed the lovely new parking lot? A year ago, there was a lovely approximately 10 YEAR OLD school building there. For some reason, CPS had no use for a building built, at taxpayers expense, just 10 years ago, so they dismantled the building for a parking lot. And CPS wants more of my tax dollars??? Not if I can help it.

at 11:53 AM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:32

Art and music classes are great if you can afford them; CPS obviously can't.
I send my children to private school by my choice, but I send one child to music lessons on my own dime.
The economy is in recession and gas is going through the roof.
I see up East that parents are expected to pay for busing for their school systems. Maybe, that should be analyzed?
Some of this problem is caused by people who don't pay property taxes; they vote for everything because it doesn't cost them.
Parents will provide more support to education if they have some financial liability tied to the schools.
I still don't understand how the schools require more money with declining enrollment.

at 2:00 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

I'll answer your question about declining enrollment and the need for money.

(A) The schools still pay for the students in charter schools and in private and parochial schools with vouchers.

In fact, those costs grow every year as the legislature mandates that CPS (and other public schools) make higher and higher payments for students in charter and voucher schools. But the legislature does NOT increase the amount coming to CPS.

(B) The decline in enrollment has levelled off--CPS now has more students than the state predicted.

The decline has allowed the district to stretch a levy that should have lasted 3-4 years to 8 years. But you can only stretch and cut so much before you start hurting kids. We're at that point now.

at 2:04 PM, February 28, 2008

usefullidiot said...

I just adore the way that the socialist teecher union puppets go running to the church for support and then stab Christians in the back.

at 2:38 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

An operating levy and building levy are two different things and you cannot pull money from one to support the other. I may not agree with all the schools being closed or consolidated but I do think the children of this City should have the best available to teach them. Most of the schools were not up to code or safe and new schools were needed. As someone who pays to send their child to Moeller high school and still pays CPS tax dollars for our home, I dont see the problem. You want better neighborhoods and families to live in the City--then you have to pay for those items...the State isnt going to and that is why every school asks levy support NOT just CPS. I may not agree with many of the Boards decisions but I do support the teachers and children of Cincinnati who deserve more than many on this post are willing to give them. Job cuts are already happening people and combining class grades is the next step. You think the State taking over our schools is a better idea? They are the ones who got us to this point! Pick a fight with the state, not the local school districts.

at 3:09 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

My husband and I are retired and are on fixed incomes. With the increased cost of virtually everything you need to exist...food, water, heat, clothing, gas, etc., an additional $500/year (the amount of our increase)in property taxes will be extremely difficult for us to manage. We have already sacrificed many of the things we had planned on doing in our later years. If you want us to think about what an increase in taxes will give to the schools, why don't you think a little about what this same increase will take away from us!!

at 3:33 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:38 If you can send your kid to Moeller, you can afford to pay higher taxes. Many of us are fixed income residents that have to cut our budgets everytime a levy passes.
My school didn't have all the extras that today's kids have, but I managed to learn. I walked about a mile to school; if you follow a bus today, it stops every three driveways.
Make the kids walk and the exercise will make them healthier.
Sorry, I have to vote no for many reasons.

at 5:01 PM, February 28, 2008

aa said...

How anyone can turn their backs on the children of Cincinnati is a mystery to me. Every child deserves a fighting chance! And it's our duty as citizens to give them that chance. Even if you don't have kids in school or if you send your kids to private school it's still the right thing to do. And if you actually take the time to learn the facts about CPS and this long overdue levy, you might find that it's not such a bad deal. The average home value in Cincinnati is about $130,00 which means the average tax increase is about $25 per month.

at 5:13 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

We voted the tax down last time, and now they keep claiming that everything has been getting better- graduation rates, discipline, etc. Keep voting no, it will keep getting better.

at 7:48 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

Must be nice for Brian Garry (pictured). He's been running for Council fulltime for two years and continues to run. When will the press investigate how he pays his bills? (And when will you investigate the guy from KY who funneled over 25% of his campaign budget and pays his rent?)

at 8:43 PM, February 28, 2008

Mark Miller said...

It costs CPS around $10,000 to educate one child. If that child transfers to a charter school, CPS writes a check for about $6000 to the charter school. CPS then pockets the extra $4000. They are lying through their teeth about how outside schools affect their budget.

It's a shame too, because they really are on the upswing in so many areas. Unfortunately finance and candor with the public aren't among those areas.

Until CPS gets its own house in order, they have no right to ask for a bigger piece of our houses.

Vote "No" on the school levy.

at 10:08 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

mark miller - you obviously are a smart guy. But you need more facts.

The reality is that 65% of children in CPS live in poverty. The district gets some extra money to provide programs that benefit low-income children. 21% of children in CPS are special ed. All of them require some type of federally mandated accommodation. Many of these accommodations cost more money than the "average" student. There are kids in the district who require, by FEDERAL law, expenditures of $50,000, $100,000, even $150,000 and more for their education.

You can be darn sure that these kids are NOT enrolled in the charter, parochial, or private schools in the area. They come to CPS because the public schools legally must serve them while the others can shut the door in their faces.

That blows this fictional "per-child" expenditure clean out of the water.

You admit that the district has been making progress. That cannot continue if the economic rug is pulled out from under the kids and teachers.

If you have concerns, call the Treasurer. He's an approachable guy. Talk to some one who knows the situation intimately.

I think you would come away with a different point of view.

at 11:58 PM, February 28, 2008

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:08,

You stated that 21% of CPS kids are special ed. I am a father of a special ed student and I have not seen special ed. numbers anywhere close to that. Am I missing something? Or is this more CPS "speak"?

at 10:00 AM, February 29, 2008

Anonymous said...

To Annon 5:01
Your statement concerning about $25.00 a month is very misleading from the point that the $25.00 is in addition to the existing levy (that based upon my adverage house costs my family about $88.00 per month. Unfornatly, property taxes are not paid (unless escrowed) per month. Based upon your figures , I will be paying about $113.00 per month. I don't have a dog in this fight, rather I only have a below (value $97,000) average house that happens to be in CPS District and the voters in rental units in the CPS District are probably going to allow me to pay more in property taxes. Give me a break, it's liberal people like you that give away everything. People like you have kept the John Cranley, and David Crawleys in City Clown-Cil.

at 10:00 AM, February 29, 2008

Anonymous said...

at 10:01 AM, February 29, 2008

Anonymous said...

I learned this at a forum sponsored by Parents for Public Schools on Wednesday evening.

Specialized education can take two forms: (a) mainstreaming and (b)special classrooms. I think in either case you might miss seeing those children. (a) They're part of the regular classroom; and (b) they're in a classroom apart from the other children.

There was a letter just the other day from a teacher in a special classroom of children with severe physical handicaps. There were nine children in her classroom. That class blows out the "per child" allotment. There are students who need an aide with them at all times--that blows out the "per child" allotment. Severe physical disabilities, severe medical disabilities, severe autism, etc., all are vastly more expensive to the school system.

I'm NOT saying that those students shouldn't be educated. EVERY CHILD has a right to an appropriate education. But to hold CPS up for its per-child average is to not recognize the fact that many students cost more to educate, whether its due to phsyical, emotional, and mental handicaps or the handicaps of poverty.

at 12:08 PM, February 29, 2008

aa said...

I don't understand why you find my $25/month statement mis leading because I clearly stated that the average home value in Cincinnati is about $130,00 which means the average tax INCREASE is about $25 per month. And the reason I gave the figure in terms on month rather than the full year is to make a point that it's a pretty small amount to pay each month. This is my opinion. If you don't agree that the number is small then that's fine and you can vote accordingly. But you are kidding yourself if you think this won't come back to bite you in the but down the road. There will be fallout if we let the school system fail and you can bet the average incease to clean up that mess will be more than $25/month.

at 12:46 PM, February 29, 2008

Anonymous said...

I understand why you indicated a month. It doesn't seem so much. I agree the $25.00 a month is not much. But when added to the other levy, it is alot. I guess we could break it down lower and indicate ( on average) it works out to 83 cents a day or 3 cents an hour. Bottom line is on my tax bill that I paid in January/2008, CPS got $531.00 out of a $856.00 tax bill. How much is enough for this school district. Based upon your average the school district will get about $680.00 of a $1006.00 tax bill. You may want to check with the Hamilton County Auditor's Office web site and verify what this additional tax will do for your school district. You may also want to check out an article in the Western Hills Press concerning CPS's ranking (according to highest/lowest) tax districts in Hamilton County.

at 2:33 PM, February 29, 2008

Anonymous said...

The problem I see is city money allocated to "new development" goes to $300k condos whose occupants don't have children. Mallory's guilt is likely the reason for his reticence. State payout per student relative to other urban districts is extremely low (26%) to Cleveland's 60%. If money was used to upgrade housing for working class families (those with kids) at least the pupil flight would start back. The state allocation rules are a century old and need attention by our legislature. The two combined items are what's causing the present problem.

I do also understand the burden on those who work and can't find solace in what they perceive is an endless request for funds. This is again the fault of the state formula which needs to be changed. The constant need to go back and ask is ridiculous, leading to inefficient planning of programs. Knowing what you have is crucial for public school leaders to plan as it is for any organizations' leaderships. Do shareholders of publicly traded corporations need to "renew" operating funds for the corporation to exist? Are there any arrangements which have a company automatically dissolve if they don't get a "go-ahead" at the annual meeting?

at 5:08 PM, February 29, 2008

Anonymous said...

People that move into 300K condos will have enough financial liability to keep the units in great shape.
Low cost housing requires constant maintenance as the renters have little to none of their own money invested.
My company got a contract to remodel single family units; appliances and toilets were stolen as fast as I could install them. I had to hire off duty police to protect my work until families could move in.
Two years later, I could start over again, but I don't have the desire to go through that again.
I guess the city found out the same thing.

at 11:13 AM, March 01, 2008

Anonymous said...

Can't we all just get along... AND VOTE NO ON THE SCHOOL LEVY

at 1:35 PM, March 01, 2008

Anonymous said...

.

25.00 a month is a half a tank of gas to get to work for the week to earn 7.95 min. wage for a lot of individuals !

Our taxes are almost 200.00 per. month. When we pay them the wRong wingnut whackos give away the county assets like Drake !

Additionally, you have phony farmers in Indian Hill getting their property tax reduced by growing vegetables for their personal use !

PATHETIC 'family values'

HAD ENOUGH, VOTE NO !

Once we see CPS going after the phony farmers, we may reconsider (they ae in Cincinnati, as well) !

at 10:08 AM, March 02, 2008

Anonymous said...

fair-a-con:
If you are making $7.95/hour you really shouldn't be mortaging a $100,000 home. Making a $600/month house payment on a $1000/month income is a bit irresponsible.

at 9:29 AM, March 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

What's really scary here is I agree with the wacko fair-a-con. At least to the point to Vote No for CPS. Why soesn't CPS sell some of it's unused schools to raise come capital to go into their operations budget. Show property owners that the CPS is trying to be as frugal as possible with the funds that they currently have. I'm seriously questioning the new SCPA school. Why is this needed on this site? Did CPS by the property for the new school, how much, and why? To much spending of existing money for me to vote to give them more. Once the existing levy is expired, then put another levy request on the ballot.

at 12:28 PM, March 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

The Enquirer reporting on the properties was slanted and full of holes, as usual.

First of all, the building money and the operating money are two totally different entities and cannot, BY LAW, be used one for the other.

1. The schools are not empty yet. There are students in most of those schools for another two years.

2. They can't sell the schools to just anyone because the legislature enacted a law forcing them to offer them to charter schools first.

3. If they are unable to sell the excess buildings they will be turned into green space for the community.

There was a special window over a year ago to sell the buildings without having to go to charter schools. They were able to sell a handful but not nearly as many as they hoped. There are significant issues (such as asbestos) that would make rehabbing and/or tearing down very expensive for any buyer. And they couldn't take possession of their purchase for another three years.

SCPA is a good case. CPS is responsible for half the amount of money needed; the other half is being raised from private donors. The old SCPA was a crumbling building. Schiel Elementary was in an old building as well.

The new SCPA will combine Schiel and SCPA into a new K-12 arts school with many amenities paid for by arts donors, not the district. The education inside will benefit from the performance spaces and practice areas that the new school will have. Academic classes will benefit from the kind of improvements that other schools are seeing in their classroom areas. And the entire school will be more energy efficient and cheaper to maintain than either older building.

But let me repeat: CPS cannot use building money to operate the schools.

at 6:16 PM, March 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

To 5:08 on 2/29:

The $300k condo point was missed. There is city money or grant money going into them in most cases. So the people who live there are supplemented by public funds. If they ARE with means to live there, then naturally they wouldn't need the builders of new facilities to be supplemented then would they (or should they)?

As to your family's experience, I sympathize. I don't advocate public money either for those who don't work. But I strongly do for those who do. I'd suggest they opt for contracts which provide good, clean, affordable, single family housing and not public projects where the money might be tempting for you and sloth for the occupants. The way to make it go is through renovation of existing structures. They relative cost vs. new structures is about 60 cents on the dollar per square foot.

I think the city and it's leaders have thrown the schools under the wheels of their own self serving goals.

BTW, are you residing in the city?

at 7:14 AM, March 04, 2008

Anonymous said...

See the students that are asking for your help at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4AYpYeCFY8

at 9:19 AM, March 04, 2008

Anonymous said...

Hey Butch,
You want to really see the students that are asking for our help, check out the bus stop in front of the Courthouse at about 2:30 until 4:00 pm. It won't be a stagged event for your viewing. Notice the amount of trash on the ground as well as out of the mouths of the students waiting for the bus. If some one can convince me that these are the same types of students in the video, CPS may want to piggy back on the Zoo levy instead.

at 10:54 PM, March 04, 2008

Anonymous said...

I think some people don't realize that those who rent will end up paying for the tax increase via the owner of the building (that is if it isn't sec8) raising the rent. I also would like to point out the great job the city of Cincinnati has done by giving 15 year tax abatements to those who have bought new residential property along the riverfront and other neighborhoods. Often times these properties are well over $300,000. Most of those buying condos, etc along the river are not families with schoolage children. What is Cincinnati doing to keep people like me within the city limits? I am single, have owned my home for over 12 years, plan on marrying within the next year or so and having children. I won't stay here paying $2000 a year in property taxes on a $120,000 house. If this levey passes, I'm looking at paying over $2,300 in taxes....absolutely rediculous.

at 5:23 PM, March 05, 2008

Anonymous said...

m.s. kline,

If...you go to the burbs, pay another $50k which over 30 years is a good amount more. Remain and stay financially viable. Nationally, $2300 for a $120k house is not all that bad. Would everyone like to see taxes lower? Who wouldn't. All the more to raise concern about waste and inequitable outlays. The inner east river corridor is a start. Neyer development corp. is another. A third is the NFL affiliated mob family we have in town.

I'd enjoy anyone accurately pointing out a windfall delivered to those affiliated with the schools. It would be rare.

Previous Posts

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

CPS, endorsers, rally on Issue 10

50 Comments: