Brutus_buckeye

you do not erase public schools. Even with a voucher system the majority of people will still choose their public school over a private or charter one. At the elementary level, one big draw for schools is their neighborhood. If the Catholic or charter is closer to where the kids live, then certainly that may be a draw. If the public school is closer then it is likely the preferred model. If you get to the high school level, the voucher will not cover all the tuition. For example, St. Ignatius is around $17k per year give or take and the voucher will only cover around 40% of that . Many people will still find the financial burden too much even with a voucher and will be inclined to stay with their public school.

This is a fair point, and maybe it may not be homogenous, but that does not mean that they are best set up to serve everyone. My sister is a product of public schools because she needed many of their special needs programs. I would argue that she would have been better served in a private school that could have catered better and more efficiently to her particular needs. That does not mean that they did not try, but after a while some kids get written off and even with the right IEP, it does not mean the public school may be the best fit for that individual student needs. Yes, public schools may have to provide services to serve all. On the surface, that is not a bad thing, but at the same time, that does not mean they can serve each individual child in the best manner and provide the best outcome. Isn't reasonable that the parents should be able to determine what is best for their individual child whom they know best vs the state who only sees raw numbers.

I think your interpretation of the conservative viewpoint misses the mark. The conservative side is not that the individual should be free to abandon schools they do not like. That is not what is happening here. After all, a child on a voucher only receives 1/2 the amount that would be paid to the private school for their education and the remaining amount the state will pay stays with the public school. I would not consider that abandonment. If it were abandonment, you would have people picking up and leaving the public system altogether and seeking to completely defund the schools. In fact, if you look at the best school districts in the state, they tend to come from areas of the state that have a lot of Republican voters or at least a strong mix of Republican or Democrat voters. The worst districts tend to be in heavily Democratic areas. To say that Republicans want to abandon the schools because they in general favor vouchers is not really a valid assessment. What I do think the key difference at least with the conservative viewpoint is that conservatives look at the child and what is best for the child individually. The problem with the public school system is that is designed as a homogenous way to serve all. This is not a bad thing, but the problem is it essentially turns people into numbers. On a macro level, when you boil people down to a statistic, the numbers work and there is a strong argument of the benefits of a collective education system. The problem, and where it fails is that when you boil it down to an individual level, you have close to half the kids who will not be as successful in a traditional public school environment and those students would be better off in a different setting. Is it fair to tell those kids that they are not able to live up to their potential simply because the numbers indicate that on the macro level, the public school is better for the majority? Especially if that individual child could succeed in an alternative setting where they would struggle and fail in their traditional public school setting? In that case, I think it is less about the "conservative" family "abandoning" the public school system and it is more about how the public school system "abandoned" that family's child and stunted their ability to achieve.

FWIW - I was less implying that Painesville was rural but more trying to state that there are kids in Painesville that will travel 30+ minutes to go to St. Ignatius because that is a choice that they feel is best for them.

But you just said that rural kids are being educated appropriately so they really do not have need for private schools. That being said, there are still options for the rural kids, but like anything they involve tradeoffs. There are kids that travel from Painesville to St. Ignatius everyday. In Cincinnati, there are kids that travel from Brown County to attend a private school an hour away. There are even kids who live in my district, which is fairly affluent, who travel to the city of Cincinnati to attend Walnut Hills or School for Creative and Performing Arts, both which are Cincinnati Public Schools. None of these schools offer a convenient option for parents and kids but they are what the parents choose to do for their child's best interests There is an assumption that public schools are a dumping ground for bad children and that if given a choice, people will always choose private schools for their children. Furthermore, it also assumes that public schools are the lone choice for disabled children, which is also false. Certainly, without vouchers, public schools become the only option for many severely disabled children. However, there are a number of private specialty schools that cater to the needs of these children. Imagine if they were able to be better funded and open up opportunities to other children in the public schools who may not be able to afford these services. This would surely relieve some of the burdens and challenges faced by the public schools and actually make their jobs a bit easier. That may be true, but the idea of sending a kid who lives down on E. St. Clair to Hawken should not be the goal. Chances are, you set that kid up to fail if you do so. Yes, there may be fewer options but there are still options, and the goal should not be to get that kid into Harvard, but to get them to a place where they can be a successful member of society as an adult and to the place where (with a voucher) their kids can attend Hawken, because they will now be in a position to allow their kids to succeed. It is about multiple generational thinking. Vouchers can be used for both public and private schools. I know people who use their voucher to go to a public school out of their district because they like the programs or that school offers other intangible benefits for the child and their family that they cannot get at their local school. In this case, that public school district can certainly say no to accepting that child but where it is mutually beneficial, they make it happen. That is good for everyone.

I think the tax money should run with the student. If the state averages $15k per year per student in high school, then I think it is more than fair to allow the families who have those students to access a voucher for $7500. This way the public school still receives direct benefit in the amount of $7500 for the fact that such student lives in the school district WHILE AT THE SAME time recognizes the fact that such student is NOT TAKING ADVANTAGE of the resources in the system and actually minimizing the burden of the school system having to educate 1 less student but still receiving 1/2 the benefit of that student actually attending. It is fair to the family who know their child best, and allow them a voice into what they think would be best for their education. Regarding the oversight, again, the money goes with the child. If the child does not fit in their "private" or "religious" school, they can go back to public school and the public school will receive the full funding for that student again instead of only the partial funding. Regarding developmentally challenged kids, not all schools are the same and therefore, you need to have options. In some cases that means the local public school with resources to assist that child, in some cases it means a specialty private school for children with disabilities. Mainstreaming is not for everyone and public schools are not for everyone either. We need to quit acting like public schools should be the only option out there. You do not need to set up parallel systems. The systems already exist. You just are funding the other schools by the children that they choose to educate. There are already reporting protocols in place that require private and parochial schools to report based on the funding they receive from voucher students. State money has never been a blank check, so we need to quit pretending otherwise. I guess, I do not really see where your concern is coming from, plus remember the public school is actually financially benefitting from children going to the private school because they still receive 1/2 the amount of money they would have received for that student and they do not have the burden of having to educate that particular student. It is a win-win for everyone.

I would have liked it better if they stacked each side of the building on top of each other creating a 25-30 story building and then left the area on Sycamore a lot for future development or built a parking garage or something there with street level retail to fill in that corner.

My neighbor was talking about this over the weekend. Our neighborhood is in 2 school districts and on his side, he was able to get a voucher for his kids but was informed that the school district had improved and his second child would not be eligible for the voucher as she was about to enter HS so he has been fretting about paying the full freight. It is good to hear this is coming to pass.

Not the worst building in the world. Reminds me of more a suburban pharma HQ but it is better than the parking lot. Maybe the Joseph family can build their own corporate HQ on that site and do something semi inspiring with it.

It could again be a matter of financing and loan program they are using. Some loan programs are for housing only and do not allow any commercial/office or other retail in the project. In order to get it built as economical as possible, the financing may only let them do residential at this time. Maybe when it is re-financed it can open up other possibilities.

True, but just with QCS, they had at least released renderings and were pushing the project with an unknown groundbreaking date for about 5 years prior to building it. You would think they would have started that process now to try and build some momentum.

I really would love to see W&S move ahead on their new building too.

Part of these decisions likely depend on the type of financing they use for the project. Some will not allow mixed use. Sometimes it is just an easier lift to not incorporate mixed use at the beginning. The project can always be modified later too.

I wonder when W&S will try and push their tower project or even the project at the Banks will be revisited as to your point, the local market has a shortage of top Class A space in the urban core. I get interest rates right now make financing such a project untenable, but it would be nice to see the planning move ahead to take advanage of market conditions in a few years when they arrive.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/former-ny-democrat-state-senator-mocked-over-student-loan-tweet-you-need-dave-ramsey-not-joe-biden The perfect example of why student loans should not be forgiven.

Predatory Interest Rates??? That is a bit of hyperbole don't you think? The vast majority of student loans are Federally guaranteed loans and they carry interest rates ranging from the mid 3% - 8% range. Nothing in these ranges would be considered predatory. Private loans have a higher rates that are attached to them but they are also more risky and are also subordinate to Federal Loans so it should be reasonable that they are higher. THere are very few private loans left anymore since Obama effectively nationalized the student loan environment but those which are are not subject to loan forgiveness from the government anyways. Given the range of interest rates for student loans, it is obvious that they are far from predatory and clearly are subsidized by tax dollars to keep rates artificially lower and affordable given the risk posed Many 18 year olds were given bad advice from their high school advisors in an effort to make their school system seem better in rankings and to demonstrate that the school district is high achieving by the amount of kids that went to college from there. The schools could care less what happened to the kids once they got to college, and they could care less what the financial burden of such kid going to a 4 year college was. It was solely about statistics and bolstering their standing on the arbitrary metric established at the time. The kids be damned, they did not matter in the grand scheme of things. No longer were trade schools and trades acceptable careers, it was all about going to college so the school district looked good in the rankings.

^ While a number of new college grads will be upset by this, it is the right decision and the reasoning is correct. The president does not have the authority to unilaterally cancel debt. The other thing I did not understand is why current college students were so excited about Biden's plan. The debt cancellation would have been a one time thing and they would not have had their debt wiped out. They would have essentially financed the forgiveness for those who were fortunate enough to graduate a couple years ahead of them and eligible for forgiveness. Current students who were not in repayment would have received nothing outside of a wink wink that they may do something for them in the future

1) What would offer the biggest bang for the buck? 2) what type of expansion could be done as economically as possible and still offer a good ROI? I certainly agree that going up to Clifton would be ideal given the density of the neighborhood and all the college students but, the topography causes challenges and makes it expensive. Is there value in a smaller expansion going west to TQL and Union Terminal and East say to the Casino, Art Museum (off Gilbert) and even up Gilbert toward Walnut Hills? That expansion certainly does not connect with the dense university areas as much but it would connect key destinations that cause people to ride the streetcar and give people more reason to say, park on the outside of the city and ride the streetcar around the core. Furthermore, with the talk about added Amtrak expansion, a spur to Union Terminal could prove very valuable as it now connects the city with regional transport and allows people traveling from out of town to navigate the area without worrying about a car. While a light rail connection to the airport would have been most ideal many years back, a streetcar spur to Union Terminal could present some good opportunities. At a very minimum, it connects with good public parking that will circulate people into the city

Whomever originally owned it and wanted to do a conversion clearly had no idea what they were doing. Yes, it was dated in an 80s motif on the inside but the rooms were fairly big, each one was a suite with a kitchen area which could have easily been converted into 1 bed apartments without having to move any walls, etc. This is the type of hotel to apartment conversion that should have been an easy thing.

Its about time something gets done there. That building is perfect and given its setup, not too difficult to renovate back into 1 bed apartments. Plus, they need to reactivate the street level retail on the block.

^ also surprised the Ren Center in Detroit was not on the list.

The state could not force private employers to force their employees to work from the office. It only applies to government workers, which I do not have a problem with. Government employees are frustrating to deal with as is, at least centralizing them in the office may help make things move more smoothly.

^ As EV's become more prevalent on the roads, there will need to be something to account for their use. Don't know if this is the right path or if there will be other options

it is the old Allison Elementary School https://www.google.com/maps/uv?pb=!1s0x8841b2ece8589d91%3A0x2e988629a61de504!3m1!7e115!4s%2Fmaps%2Fplace%2Falison%2Belementary%2Bschools%2Bnorwood%2F%4039.1581106%2C-84.4609873%2C3a%2C75y%2C162.05h%2C90t%2Fdata%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211syiIDAjr7prFduKwfeEacfg*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x8841b2ece8589d91%3A0x2e988629a61de504%3Fsa%3DX!5salison elementary schools norwood - Google Search!15sCgIgAQ&imagekey=!1e2!2syiIDAjr7prFduKwfeEacfg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiniY69jNX_AhWYmGoFHQ7dAjAQpx96BAgtEAU

The old elementary school is getting redeveloped as townhomes and condos.