Hts121

Right. But that is different and much smaller than non-resident tuition.

Not quite. If you live in the Shaker school district, you likely don't pay that much to the district in taxes.

Likely. I imagine it has to reflect the "per pupil" cost to the District. Fyi, you can get into a good montessori school for about that much, maybe even less.

Yes. Here's an example - http://www.shaker.org/parents/archive/policies/documents/JEDA2008-2009.pdf

The Chagrin River separates "God's Country" from the rest of us heathens...

Quarterbacks that can throw like CP don't grow on trees. While I realize he has never fully recovered from that devastating knee injury, I would be hesitant to let him go without a proven backup plan if I was Brown. Plus, letting everyone know that the two of you have mutually agreed to part ways does nothing but bring down his trade value.

Imagine if you referred to a grown man as "black boy"

Am I the only one who can't figure out how to view the new Master Plan?

I agree. Moot point. Just one minor point of clarification. I believe the County owns Huntington and the City owns Willard.

Right! As much as I love the Seattle proposal, tearing down the garages for the grassy hill concept made zero sense. It's not like that would magically make the area some calm, pastoral setting with the railroad and shoreway right there. More infrastructure- not less- is the solution to connecting downtown to the lakefront. I disagree. To me that proposal would be similar to the brooklyn promenande, with the BQE, Furman and Columbia streets directly under. I lived right before moving to Harlem and it wasn't that bad nor did it stop people walking the promenade or just sitting out and taking in the view. It hasn't stopped people from coming out to enjoy a day. But you have to consider the butterfly effect you are setting off. Those two garages are packed each and every day. When you add in that they just took down one Justice Center parking garage, where do you expect those vehicles to park? Follow through on the Seattle proposal and you can chalk up any dreams we have for the WHD lots. I can guarantee you that. Now... turning the top levels (and JUST the top levels) into green space is something worth considering.

Almost all of these theatres have closed. Here on the east side, the one on the Coventry strip is now a bar, so is the one in Lyndhurst. The old Mayfield Road theatre near Noble is a liquor store (after about a 10 year run as a Hollywood video). They just can't compete with the huge multi-plex theatres. The only way they survive is to have a niche, like Cedar-Lee does with the indy and foreign films.

I would be shocked if either Willard or Huntington are demoed. Both are cash cows. Plus, you take either of thos down and the WHD surface lots become that much more valuable. They are both built into a hillside and put behind buildings you are going to build nothing up against.... and built between those buildings and the shoreway. We need more garages like those two, not less.

It's certainly possible, but there would be a few caveats. It is not a steady stream and would depend totally on the amount of deaths in any given community, any given year. So, I could believe that one year in one very well-to-do Village or Townshiip (e.g. Bentleyville), it accounted for a large chunk of the revenue. 80% would suprise me, though.

Yeah. It's spread around after the State taxes the estate. But the article you posted does not support the assertion that the estate tax accounts for 80% of any political subdivision's revenue.

^The estate tax? Interesting if true. Do you have anything that supports that assertion?

I agree the little ones can be quite mean. My mom had to get rid of her Jack Russell because she couldn't get homeowners insurance because he had a propensity for biting joggers running in front of her house. However, those joggers recieved a little nick on their leg, whereas a pit bull attacking causing much more damage than that. Much, much, much more.

On the estate tax issue, I understand the argument that more often than not it amounts to double taxation - i.e. I am taxed once when I earn the money and then the money is taxed again when I leave it to my heirs. But, then again, it is not really ME that is being taxed again, but rather my heir who in most circumstances did nothing to earn the money. And anybody who knows anything on this subject knows that good estate planning will minimize the impact, if not eliminate it altogether. If anything, I say close those loopholes/tricks. On the pit bull issue, regardless of how you view the breed, I would say it is a necessary law. Too many irresponsible people own these dogs for the wrong reasons and with malicious intent. Because of that, they are a plague on society, especially here in Cleveland. Making the owners carry insurance, keep the dog from running loose, and mandating some way to identify the dog (tatoos or microchips) is fair and necessary IMO. Whenever I see some story of a young child, small pet or other easy target getting mauled by a dog, I would say that 8 or 9 times out of 10 it involves a pit bull. j40j makes a good point that the physical characteristics and capabilities alone justify the law. House cats are no less vicious, but they aren't big enough to cause the same level of carnage.

^That's not true. One of my roommates had a pit in college. She was not trained to be vicious, yet we really had to keep our eye on her. She killed a puppy one of my other roommates brought home for no reason. I agree that they CAN be docile, but they have some instincts that other dogs don't. When they are trained to bite, that makes it that much worse. And they are trained to be vicious too much. My problem with Pit Bulls is that people are buying them more as a fashion statement than anything else right now. The tatoos/microchips, mandatory insurance, and leash laws applicable to these dogs is a good thing considering how many are owned by irresponsible owners and their propensity to attack weaker targets like old ladies and young kids.

I'm not in favor of bball court, but you could look on the bright side..... at least it would give all the thugs something to do other than hootin and hollering at out women, beating up a few of our forumers who always manage to get attacked on public square, and stealing purses from grandma on the rapid.

Then what the H E double hockey sticks are you arguing about. Heaven forbid Cleveland end up on the right end of one of these lists without the usual suspects coming in to pour water on it

You'll need some golf shoes to get out of this muck.

With a bit of luck, his life was ruined forever. Always thinkin that just behind narrow doors in all his favorite bars, men in red woolen sweaters are getting incredible kicks from things he'll never know.

And Cleveland is gay friendly even if it is not a "mecca".... however you want to define that. That's all I am saying. It has a dp registry. Does Columbus? That is representative not of the presence of the gay community in the City, but rather the City's friendliness towards gays. Further, Cleveland Hts was the first community in the entire country to create a registry by ballot measure. I'm not saying anything about Columbus. I really don't know enough about the gay scene down there to downplay it.

Once again, I would say the there is a difference between a "gay mecca" and being "gay friendly".

Those Fox News viewer polls aren't very accurate.