1 in 100 Americans in prison: study

globeandmail.com: 1 in 100 Americans in prison: study ,,,More than one in every 100 American adults is in jail or prison, according to a new report tracking the surge in inmate population and urging states to rein in corrections costs with alternative sentencing programs.

The report, released Thursday by the Pew Center on the States, said the 50 states spent more than $49 billion on corrections last year, up from less than $11 billion 20 years earlier. The rate of increase for prison costs was six times greater than for higher education spending, the report said.

Schenley Splits

First up, Jen L's email:

Sorry, the following is solely a personal rant! Feel free to skip it, I'll try to be less biased and more informational again in the future.

I guess it took this vote to really crystallize what I find wrong with dividing up Schenley, both the building and the kids. It's not only broken the kids apart, it will, by design it seems, pit the schools against the other.

I chose the magnet program because I believed in the idea that different kinds of kids could learn things from each other. I chose it because when I asked for changes or better choices, I wasn't asking just for my kid(s), but for the whole school, the whole concept. I wasn't in it just for my kids, but for all of their cohort, their peers.

Now, I'm in a position where fighting for the best interests of my child (in particular my 8th grader) pits me against those kids who would have been his class, his cohort at Schenley.

To demand the best teachers teach at Frick next year is to lessen the possibility of the kids at University Prep having those same teachers.

To spend the money to make this staying behind palatable is to spend money that could have been better spent on a unified school, guidance counselors, mentors, improved programs.

To demand a range of classes (CAS, PSP, mainstream, electives) at Frick is to ask for resources that will take away from the kids at University Prep and Reizenstein.

To have programs move with the Schenley kids to Reizenstein (Youth and Government, the musical, band, chorus, etc.) is to deny other kids those same opportunities or to require duplication (likely impossible with only a small school).

This division guarantees that the good and great teachers have to make choices about where to be -- and right now there's not much room for them at University Prep! I can't see how they can be fairly split in the future, either.

I don't know how to ask for what's right for my kid when it's going to hurt other people's kids, because that's not right.

Less rambling, more planning later. I'd like to try to get together a meeting of 8th grade Frick parents just to nail down some of our questions and also to have some idea of who's still on board, who's wavering and who is off to Allderdice, Central Catholic, CAPA... The first A+ meeting about the IB/IS program is next Thursday (downtown, at 5:30 pm).

Don't feel like there are any great options right now, but hey, things change all the time, right? (That PA cyber charter ad that came on the radio just as I turned on the car...fate or temptation?!)

Jen Lakin

Jen -- let's not just meet with the parents of others with kids in the 8th grade. We need to meet more -- and we need to have open meetings.

And, rant away any time.

Amy posted:

As you know by now, the board voted to move the current 9-11 students to Reizenstein and have the IS freshman class for next year housed at Frick. I have not heard anything from any committee members (except Jen who is as upset as I am), so I don't know if anything else can be done. I wish now that we had focused more effort on keeping the 9th grade IS with us. It will be nearly impossible to determine until September the effects of having the 9th grade at Frick. By then, it might be too late.

There are so many questions that need to be answered concerning this move. I would advise attending the meetings being organized by A+Schools. I tried to copy/paste the info but got Japanese (or Chinese?) so if you are interested, go to their address below, which did paste in English. The meeting for IB information is Thursday, March 6 from 5:30 to 8 pm. You need to make a reservation; dinner is provided and child care if necessary.

http://aplusschools.org/excel.html

There is still a possibility that this is a temporary move but I personally think that will be determined by how active and involved the parents remain. I also think that we are in a position to demand/bargain for what we want at the new school. It is unfortunate that it seems that the squeaky wheel seems to be listened to (sorry about the misused metaphor, I am not feeling particularly creative). I think that Mr. Roosevelt wants this move to succeed so we need to ask for what we want now.

I am sure that I will be sending more info later as information is released to us. Tons of questions: staffing for the "new/old" schools? extra-curricular? language teachers? transportation? . . .

amy moore (phone # nuked)

Pittsburgh Pist-Gazette nails it

Pittsburgh Pist-Gazette The most awesome Super City Planner ever to roam the earth.

Ron Morris' - The American Entrepreneur FREE Newsletter

See the same article, but at another site.

Ron Morris' - The American Entrepreneur FREE Newsletter: "A LOOK AT CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, PART 3

Mark Rauterkus is a frequent contributor to TAE.

Proposal to Bankers for a Campaign Marriage, with drive-through guests

City schools sell old South Vo-Tech High

City schools sell old South Vo-Tech High: "The Pittsburgh Public Schools board has agreed to sell the former South Vo-Tech High School for $1.1 million to Gregory Development."

I am so angry at the schools right now. I'm bitter.

We need a Vo Tech School.

We need to sell lots of OTHER schools in other needy neighborhoods.

South could sit.

Sell the Board of Ed Building in Oakland.

The South Side School, Phillips, is at capacity. It has no gym, no stage, no hope of expansion with pre-K students. A move to a re-habed South from Phillips for a K-8 school would have made great sense.

Selling South was stupid.

Last night, it also approved a resolution authorizing the chief operations officer and the solicitor to "expeditiously move forward with the disposal" of 20 closed buildings, for which the ongoing maintenance costs exceed a total of $1 million.

If a building fails to sell "in their initial attempt," then the two are authorized to find a "responsible entity, within the immediate community of the school," which could receive the building at a nominal cost.

The 20 buildings are Beltzhoover, Boggs, Burgwin, Chatham, Columbus, Connelley, East Hills, Gladstone, Knoxville, Lemington, Letsche, Madison, Mann, Miller, Morningside, Prospect, Rogers (which will be vacant in 2009), Vann, Washington and West Side.

Glowing Downtown billboard transfixes council for 6 hours

Glowing Downtown billboard transfixes council for 6 hours: "A glowing billboard slated for the new Grant Street Transportation Center was the subject of a sometimes-heated special meeting of Pittsburgh City Council yesterday.

The meeting lasted nearly six hours but ended without resolution of a conflict regarding the approval of the sign without any public hearings or votes."

I watched some of this on the cable TV last night. It put me to sleep after a while. Train wreck. And, at a transportation building no less. Since it is a public building, it is an expensive train wreck.

I posted in the past that the move to make the chair of the meeting be put into the hands of Rev. Burgess was the power move.

Here is some logic that I do NOT understand.

Because there has NOT been a complaint nor a protest in the past five years does NOT mean that everything is fine now. The date can turn into a rape. Things can sour and turn illegal after 10 minutes, after 100 minutes, after 10 dates or after 10 years.

This is "an outright, illegal, underhanded deal" -- it is what it is, regardless of what's been done on some private bit of property in another part of the city.

The big picture, and I do NOT mean all 1,200 square foot of the lighted display, is authority madness. This is a parking structure that is being built by the Parking Authority. The fix is simple. Liquidate the Parking Authority. Liquidate the URA too.

I've made many complaints about that over the year. You can read my logs too.

"Never look at the zoning ordinance in a snapshot of time. ... Interpretations evolve. Interpretations become precedents." Giggle. Mr. Ford needs to be fired. That's a snapshot that I'd love to see.

Then Bruce Kraus got yelled at by the guy he gave the bear hug to. "Jimmmmmmyyyyyy!"

Then comes the notion of a connection of "FREE" -- and "without need to vote." That, for me, was the money quote. Because something is 'free' means that is is unaccountable, so hinted the 'gray-area bald guy, Mr. Ford.'

Getting the Picture - Surveillance cameras are on their way ... will they make Pittsburgh any safer? - Main Feature - Main Feature - Pittsburgh City P

Getting the Picture - Surveillance cameras are on their way ... will they make Pittsburgh any safer? - Main Feature - Main Feature - Pittsburgh City Paper - Pittsburgh: "Getting the Picture
Surveillance cameras are on their way ... will they make Pittsburgh any safer?"

Proposal to Bankers for a Campaign Marriage, with drive-through guests

Part 3 in a series on Campaign Finance Reform

by Mark Rauterkus of Pittsburgh's South Side

What happens in Las Vegas stays there and is kept confidential elsewhere, so they claim. Libertarians love privacy. Concealing personal matters is splendid. Small business banking should be kept under wraps too. Developing trade secrets and future strategies need to be cloaked in the marketplace.

However, Pittsburgh's political dealings and the associated campaign finances of candidates seeking public offices is a much different matter. Pittsburgh public should be at the opposite end of the spectrum of Vegas behaviors. The private deeds of Vegas should not be handled like public dances of local politicians in campaigns for votes.

This simple, free-market solution for government cuts governmental red tape and insures wider public participation through observation within our political campaigns. The campaign finance reform discussion (also see parts 1 and 2) calls us to think again on how to conduct local political races.

Now bankers and financial institutions can help to fix, rather than exasperate the folly. PNC Bank gets major windfalls from deals to refinance the city's debt. PNC Bank gets corporate welfare for downtown buildings and public garages next to its FirstSide office. Bankers, now is the time to provide a new type of basic service with a twist that helps citizens insure that campaigns for elected office are better able to be scrutinized.

As a citizen, I'm calling upon bankers at large and small institutions to help advance a new solutions. The implementation of the ideas will impact our political lives and become a best practice model with major ramifications. I do not advocate for public funds to finance the campaigns. The public treasury is too poor to do that. This new type of checking account cost nothing for the city and public sector.

Let's get local banks (or even one bank) to establish a new product for the specific use of political campaigns. This new service from the banking institutions would cater to campaigns, candidates and political action committees, called PACs. This product and service: a "Transparent PAC Account."

Banks generally emphasize privacy and identity protection. In this service, the opposite is desired. The goal of Transparent PAC Accounts is for giving notice of the accounts and to empower everyone and anyone to witness all transactions: deposits, payments, balances.

Transparent PAC Accounts would empower public viewing of campaign finances. Transparent PAC Accounts would eliminate doubts as to what campaigns and candidates are bought and paid for by which generous, special-interest donors.

Revealing campaign funds and transactions in modern ways with real-time postings of bank transactions on the internet is easily done with online banking. Everyone should be able to see all of the deposits (donations) into the campaign coffers of politicians. Tools should be made available so every voter can see how candidates save and spend money to fund their campaigns.

These accounts hosted at local banks (and even credit unions) could would be much like TRUST FUNDS in that others can witness the inflow and outflow of the funds. However, in this case, the trustees are the public. These trust funds exist in the world of banking today.

Candidates would happily move away from existing bank accounts stressing privacy into these Transparent PAC Accounts for their political action committees because filing requirements would vanish. Transparent PAC Accounts wipes away the need for need for governmental red tape in this realm. Since Transparent PAC Accounts have visible bank statements and histories that can't be manipulated and are hosted by trusted financial institution, candidates would only need to post the bank and account number details. Everyone, including media, opponents and watchdogs get clear views. The department of election and state can avoid redundant filing of paper records for those that use Transparent PAC Accounts.

Honesty, openness and accountability is needed and provided with Transparent PAC Accounts as new campaign finance measures are enacted. Otherwise, candidates can keep two sets of books and conceal wrongdoings. Pennsylvania is light-years behind in reforms of democracy. As a city, county and state, we have few if any campaign finance measures.

Pittsburgh's Transparent PAC Accounts could be a leading trend setter among local and national politicians, building on our banking and finance legacy.

Transparent PAC Accounts can lift the lid off of back-room dealings among politicians and special interest donors. Taxpayers and citizens get screwed when that "what-happens-in-Vegas attitude" surfaces among political players. Transparent PAC Accounts provide one way to keep the lights on.

---

Postings in this series:

Part 1: Local Campaign Finance Reform http://rauterkus.blogspot.com/2008/02/local-campaign-finance-reform.html

Part 2: Making an ethical stand. http://rauterkus.blogspot.com/2008/02/making-ethical-stand-ethical-operations.html

Part 3: Proposal to Bankers for a Campaign Marriage, with drive-through guests http://rauterkus.blogspot.com/2008/02/proposal-to-bankers-for-campaign.html

Unwelcome Bill - Blogs - Slag Heap - Pittsburgh City Paper - Pittsburgh

I love it when I'm able to change the course of history -- or in this case -- a few recycled electrons at a blog posting by Chris Potter, journalist with the City Paper.

The following is new content to the article from Potter that ran earlier today.

Unwelcome Bill - Blogs - Slag Heap - Pittsburgh City Paper - Pittsburgh In order to prevent the city from similarly ignoring its own limits, Rauterkus suggested adding teeth to Peduto's measure. Contributors found exceeding the limits, Rauterkus recommended, should be denied any chance to receive city contracts or remittances until the officials they contributed to left office. Rauterkus also suggested creating a 'Scarlet Letter' list to publicize the name of violaters.)

Edge of Sports Radio gets an opening -- kick off shows

Where sports and politics merge. I have followed this guy for some time.

http://edgeofsports.com/audio.html

Or if you want to skip around:

THE OPENER
http://media.leftjabradio.com/02-23-08%20Edge%20of%20Sports1.wma

INTERVIEW WITH DR. JOHN CARLOS
http://media.leftjabradio.com/02-23-08%20Edge%20of%20Sports2.wma

INTERVIEW WITH NEW ORLEANS SAINT
Scott FUJITA & Ari BYKOFSKY
http://media.leftjabradio.com/02-23-08%20Edge%20of%20Sports3.wma

Double Yoy!

RIP.

Two depart. Myron Cope has died.

But, there is more. We lost another last night too. A church friend has passed away as well.

Getting additional coverage in the Pgh City Paper

(A rare spark was provided by Avenging Libertarian Mark Rauterkus, who referred to county officials as "law-breaking scum" for having ignored a law county council passed five years ago to put campaign contributions on-line.)

See the article called, Unwelcome Bill No one wants to speak out against city councilor Bill Peduto's effort to limit campaign contributions, at least not yet. But no one is rushing to vote for it, either. Peduto's bill, which would limit campaign contributions to local ...

Today's Campaign Finance Reform HEARING -- and coverage in the P-G on the scarlet letter

The P-G article and my quote:

"I think you'll be laggards if you vote no on this," added Mark Rauterkus, a member of an advisory committee that has been honing the legislation for years. He proposed that violators be barred from receiving any city money -- including their salaries if they are city officials or employees.

The article says 9 out of 10 people who spoke were in favor of the bill. I spoke under the column of "comments." That is neither FOR nor AGAINST -- but -- clearly I'm in favor of getting something onto the books.

Labor opposes city campaign contribution limits
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
By Rich Lord, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Nine out of 10 speakers at a public hearing today on proposed city of Pittsburgh campaign finance reform favored the idea, but the lone opponent was a representative of organized labor, a powerful political player.

"The bill limits the voice of the working class by restricting the amounts that can be given by political action committees," said Dave Vinski, of the Southwestern Pennsylvania Area Labor Federation, who said he was speaking on behalf of Allegheny County Labor Council President Jack Shea. Unions often form PACs to contribute to candidates that they favor.

"Creating limits will stymie transparency," Mr. Vinski continued. "Loopholes are always found, no matter how well-intentioned a proposal is."

His was decidedly the minority view on legislation by Councilman William Peduto that would bar any individual from giving more than $2,500 to a candidate for city office, and any partnership or political action committee from donating more than $5,000.

"This bill proposes a very common-sense, reasonable approach," said Barbara Grover, a board member of the League of Women Voters. She said 75 cities have enacted limits on campaign contributions.

{Insert my quote here -- shown above)

Under Mr. Peduto's proposal, if a person made a campaign contribution at the maximum level, he or she would be ineligible for any no-bid contracts from the city. The city's Ethics Hearing Board would be charged with advertising the new limits and hearing any complaints of violations. The controller's office would be charged with placing all campaign finance reports filed by candidates on a Web site.

It is based on a Philadelphia ordinance that survived a legal challenge that went to the state Supreme Court.

Council expects to hold a special meeting on the proposal next month, and then vote on it.

I had to speak and run out of the meeting to get my son after school. I didn't NOT watch the speakers that came after me. But, I'll tune in on the weekend on the tape re-broadcasting. My statement should be posted in a day or so.

Doctor Ron Paul's look at health care

Subject: Ron Paul's health care bill

• Would you like a refund on your taxes for every dollar you spend on health care, including your insurance premiums?
• Would you like to pay less for health insurance, while having more and more money to fund your own health care?
• Would you like to see health care expenses go down, while quality improves?
• Congressman Ron Paul has a bill that would accomplish all of this: the "Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act" (H.R. 3343). Please urge Congress to pass this bill.

Why we need Congressman Paul's bill . . .

The federal government owes $53.3 trillion in unfunded liabilities for Medicare and Social Security. Instead of figuring out how to fund these commitments, the politicians keep promising more spending, especially on health care.

It's important to understand that government health care spending is the real cause of America's health care crisis. Government already pays for nearly half of all medical care in this country. This makes government the primary determiner of health care prices . . .

• Bureaucrats decide what the government will pay for any given procedure
• Lobbyists influence the prices the bureaucrats set
• Insurance companies then follow the government's lead in terms of what they will pay

Health care costs are soaring because the prices are set by bureaucrats and lobbyists, instead of by free market competition.

To better understand how damaging this is just look at what's happened to the cost and quality of Lasik eye surgery, which isn't funded by the government, or insurance . . .

According to the federal government's Bureau of Labor Statistics the price for Lasik surgery has dropped from $2,106 in 1999 to $1,626 in 2004! The quality has also improved dramatically, even though the cost has fallen.

The same could be true for all health care procedures if prices were set by free market competition, instead of by bureaucrats and lobbyists.

But the problem gets even worse. Government tax polices have created incentives that tie most people's health insurance policies to their employer. This means "your" insurance companies work for your boss, and not for you. Losing your job could mean a catastrophic loss of medical care.

America's health care crisis is entirely the creation of the politicians in Congress. And now they want to use the crisis they've created to grab still more power and money, at a time when the government is facing a looming bankruptcy.

Congressman Ron Paul has introduced a bill that would solve these problems, immediately. His "Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act" (H.R. 3343) would . . .

• Give you a 100% refund from your taxes of every dollar you spend on medical care, including insurance premiums.
• Make it easier for your employer to deposit the money it now gives to the health insurance companies into a Health Saving Account that would belong to you
• This money would come to you tax free -- you could use it to fund your health care and your insurance premiums
• This means your health insurance would belong to you, not your employer
• You would have the money to pay small medical expenses with your Health Savings Account, which would allow you to reduce your insurance premiums by buying a Major Medical Plan, instead of a Cadillac Plan
• You would also earn interest on the money in your Health Savings Account, tax free -- you would get this interest instead of the insurance companies getting it (collecting interest on premiums is how the insurance companies make their money -- these profits could be yours instead)
• Plus, you would become your doctor's customer, instead of the government or your insurance company being your doctor's customer
• This would place the consumer in charge, creating competition that would lower prices and improve quality

Of course, neither the insurance companies nor the health care lobbyists want these changes, so you will have to fight for them. Do three things . . .

• Ask Congress to pass Ron Paul's "Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act" (HR 3343)
• Share this message with others
• Make a contribution to further our work

Democracy Rising cartoon

First frame: What do the PA Senate's Lobbying Bill and my great grandmother have in common?

Click to see second frame and punch line.Democracy Rising Pennsylvania Cartoon

Sounds similar to the proposed campaign finance reform bills being put forth by Bill Peduto. I've proposed (scroll down) a 'teeth transplant' to the bill as a friendly amendment. We'll see if it comes into being.

Video poker might be good bet: Onorato

Onorato says PAT problems run deep. Yep. deep, as in under the river. And deep again, as in Dan won't do anything about them.

Video poker might be good bet: Onorato - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review He said Port Authority's problems run deep.

Last year Onorato put executive pay at PAT in a 'frozen mode.' When executives are grossly over paid -- freezing them is the wrong thing to do. Cuts were demanded of the workers. Freezing happened to the top. That's not a fix.

The excessive pay has happened on Onorato's watch. Finally, now, they are starting to tighten up the golden parachutes that have been part of their game plans. Dan executed them well. These give-aways happened while Onorato was County Controller.

Blast from the past: By the way, back in 2000 when I ran for mayor (yes, it was an election held in May 2001, but I had announced I was running in August 2000.) I talked a great deal about video poker machines. The solution of video poker has been under discussion for many many years in some circles. Finally Onorato and others (media) have taken notice.

Video Poker Machines could be a cornerstone to insure that our region has the GREATEST Park District in the nation. Or, we can continue to have one of the worst landscapes for public parks programming.

Mcall.com: Q & A with Onorato

Dan doesn't see the need to lead.

Mcall.com: Capitol Ideas with John L. Micek Blog: Are you holding back because you think it's distracting to voters, or does it send a message?: 'I just haven't seen any need to do it at this point in time. Besides, April 22, the voters of Pennsylvania will be able to make their own decision.'

Dan doesn't see the need to follow the law either. In terms of campaign finance reform, the county election department is OUT OF BOUNDS. Local acts were passed that instructed the administration to put the campaign finance reports of candidates onto the internet, years ago. And Onorato didn't see the need. It wasn't done. Following laws is an option for him. He does what he wants. Taking advice and charting a course of leadership is more of a whim.

Onorato bucks certain forces of nature and shoves the drink tax and car rental tax onto the backs of certain populations. That money is to pay for -- so he said -- the operations at PAT (Transit Authority). But, he does NOTHING but advance the boondoggle of the tunnels under the river for a minor expansion of the light rail to serve the North Side stadiums and slots parlor.

Results of Presidential Election Released Early

Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early

Bill's letter to action @ campaign finance reform

Dear Pittsburgh City residents:

Pittsburgh City Councilmembers need to hear from YOU!

Tomorrow, February 26TH, at 2 PM, City Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed campaign finance reform legislation recently introduced by Councilman Bill Peduto that aims to limit individual and PAC contributions to individuals running for political offices in Pittsburgh (i.e. Mayor, Controller, Council).

As observed in Philadelphia and other cities that have already implemented similar rules, passing this legislation would help to further reform the local government process by limiting the impact of large-scale donors and reducing their access to decision-makers, while also enabling less well-funded candidates to run for office.

If you would like to make a public comment (limit three minutes) at tomorrow's hearing, please call Linda Johnson-Wassler in advance at 412-255-2138 to sign up.

Tuesday, February 26th, at 2 PM in City-Council Chambers 5th Floor, 414 Grant Street

To urge your City Council member to support the proposal, go to http://www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/council/

Links:
Campaign Finance Regulation Ordinance proposed by Counciman Bill Peduto
http://legistar.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/detailreport/?key=10285

Post-Gazette article announcing the proposed legislation: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08007/847284-53.stm

Recent City Paper article on the proposed legislation: http://www.pittsburghcitypaper.ws/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A42016

Bill Godshall

Jen L (fellow parent, taxpayer, customer) is asking us to 'think positive' in terms of the looming vote to close Schenley High

Jen wrote in an email:

Hi all --

Well, a lot of issues were thrown into the mix at the agenda review meeting last Wednesday -- what are the real costs, what is the sense in creating a segregated school, what are the costs of renovating three buildings compared to renovating one, what is the real time frame needed to renovate Schenley, is it necessary to move the students out, what is the status of the program planning, for instance.

Not surprisingly, there still aren't a lot of answers to these important questions. There doesn't seem to be an overall plan for the district beyond these changes, the sci-tech high school concept is still up in the air, particularly as to location, money is being spent, and input into program changes isn't being taken until after tomorrow's vote. (Visit www.aplusschools.org for a list of meetings, the first, about University Prep takes place on Thursday.)

The wording remains unchanged, so a yes vote tomorrow will split Schenley students into 10-12th grades located at Reizenstein, add 9th grade at Frick for one year, and reopen Milliones for a 9th grade class of University Prep (only one grade to be located there next year). Also, a request to submit to the state the construction plans to move ahead with a renovation of Reizenstein will be voted on.

If you can, send a letter of Schenley support to the board asking them to act in a responsible and well thought out manner, considering all the ramifications of their actions. We request that board members vote no or table the items regarding moving Schenley students separately and spending on multiple buildings. If it is felt that students must be moved next year, the wording should be changed to "temporary move" and should plan to move all students together.

Some points to consider:

-- Any money spent on currently closed facilities to establish "new schools" is money that could and should be spent on Schenley High School, the most architecturally impressive and structurally sound building of the district buildings.

-- Schenley's location in Oakland is ideal for both an international program and a university affiliated program

-- Using Reizenstein as a high school creates a corridor of high schools in the East End, likely necessitating other closures or moving of students. An overall plan for the East End (or for the district as a whole) should be formulated before decisions are made and funds are spent to open another school there.

The estimates for improvements at Reizenstein are in the $15-$21 million range.
Improvements on the Milliones facility range similarly from $12 million upwards.
The costs for improvements at Frick, for one year of use by 9th graders, are requested at $5 million.

These costs added together would be close to the costs for renovating the Schenley building, which would provide a facility that could house both a University Prep and IB/IS 9-12 program in one centrally located building.

-- The PPS administration has not explored all viable solutions nor have they taken a holistic view of the importance that Schenley has for the city and the communities that it serves.

-- A Financial Task Force of Schenley backers is exploring a wide variety of funding options, that the district has not yet considered, in order to piece together the puzzle of the cost of upgrading the building.

And any thing else you find important!

You can send letters to the entire board at boardoffice@pghboe.net.

Or you can contact your school board member or Mark Roosevelt directly at:

Mark Roosevelt- mroosevelt1@pghboe.net
Heather Arnet- harnet1@pghboe.net
Mark Brentley- mbrentley1@pghboe.net
Theresa Colaizzi - tcolaizzi1@pghboe.net
Jean Fink- jfink1@pghboe.net
Sherry Hazuda- shazuda1@pghboe.net
Bill Isler- wisler1@pghboe.net
Floyd McCrea- fmccrea1@pghboe.net
Thomas Sumpter- tsumpter1@pghboe.net
Randall Taylor- rtaylor1@pghboe.net

If you do know a board member personally and are comfortable calling them with your concerns and requests, that can't hurt either.

And then, think positive Schenley thoughts!

Jen Lakin