WakeEd

The WakeEd blog is devoted to discussing and answering questions about the major issues facing the Wake County school system. How much will the new Democratic majority on the school board do to undo the changes made by Republicans since 2009? Will the new student assignment plan be a hybrid of the last two models or primarily be a return to the use of busing for diversity? Who will replace Tony Tata as the new superintendent of the state's largest district? How will voters react to a likely request in 2013 to borrow potentially more than $1 billion to build and renovate schools?

WakeEd is maintained by The News & Observer's Wake schools reporter, T. Keung Hui. While Keung posts information and analysis on the issues, keep us posted on your suggestions, questions, tips and what you're doing to cope with the changes in Wake's schools.

Choose a blog

Bill could cut Wake County school system out of any say in school construction

Bookmark and Share

Is it time for the Wake County school board to try to negotiate the best possible school construction management deal with the county commissioners?

The legislation allowing county governments to take over all school facilities responsibilities from school boards has pretty sweeping language. It would relegate school boards to the sidelines in counties which exercise the ownership authority.

"The county shall consult the board of education in the siting, design, construction, equipping, expansion, improvement, or renovation of the property," according to S236.

The key word is "consult." It doesn't say commissioners have to do what the school board wants.

For instance, Joe Bryan, chairman of the Wake County Board of Commissioners, said they'd still have the school district set the target rings for new schools. The county would then try to purchase sites within the circles.

But the legislation doesn't say that the county has to do that.

School board member John Tedesco has been trying to persuade his colleagues to cut a deal with commissioners that would allow them to still have some say on school construction issues.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Majority?

I didn't realize that you ran a poll to see what the majority want. I don't believe relegating the school board to the sidelines will help anyone, especially students. I don't think that the CC will have the best interest of the students in mind when they choose the location of 9th grade centers, high schools etc. They should be more focused on cost. If I were on the school board I would be looking into creating more regulations with regards to building schools and I would do it fast.

They will have a "say"

The proposed law says that CC must consult with BoE.
That means they will have a say, it just might not be
adopted by the CC.

Good thinking...

John Tedesco is correct about this, but it may be too late to stop the train.

The school board liberals' unwillingness to compromise will likely get them steamrolled. They could have given up on direct managerial control in exchange for a lot of influence in school construction. But, since they didn't do that, they're likely to get neither, and that's a bad thing for the school district -- there are thousands of small ways that a school's siting and construction will impact day-to-day education. The district knows them all; the county knows none.

Warped Thinking

Warped thinking on the part of the commissioners is more like it. So the Republicans didn't win the school board majority...cry a river. Now they are getting their friends in the legislature and WC commission to do what they couldn't and control more of the schools - uh - especially where the money is. Duh - everyone seeing the obvious? The only thing is that the pendulum will swing back - it always does. And we'll still be stuck with this stupid situation of the commissioners having way to much say in an area where they should rightly let WCPSS do it's job - including the BOE. It's just that the Dems will be in control. Be careful what you wish for folks. This legislation is idiotic.

Remember This Little Gem...

WCPSS has proven themselves to be morons....tell me again why they should be trusted with our tax dollars for school buildings? They are incompetent...did you hear the one where they didn't get appraisals for the land they purchased. MORONS!

Board reverses itself on Apex school land

******

CORRECTION

A Page 1B story published June 20 in some editions about the Wake school board's decision to nullify an $8.7 million land purchase in Apex for new schools gave the incorrect title for Ed Bonner at Trademark Properties. Bonner is the chief operating officer.

******

RALEIGH -- The Wake County School Board voted Tuesday to nullify a $8.7 million land deal that would have financially benefited key public supporters of last year's school bond referendum.

The vote, which was not scheduled on the agenda distributed before the board's meeting, came less than two weeks after The News & Observer filed a public records request asking the school system to provide all documents and internal e-mail pertaining to the purchase of 108.4 acres off Humie Olive Road in Apex.

The school board voted Feb. 6 to buy the land, which was to be the site of a new high school and middle school, at a price of about $80,000 an acre. The property is owned by Apex Olive LLC, a development company in which Cary software mogul Jim Goodnight is a partner.

Apex Olive had bought the tract in April 2006 for $3.25 million. Under the purchase price approved by the school board, the company would have netted a 168 percent profit in less than a year.

Goodnight was a strong public advocate of the $970 million school construction bond approved by voters in November. In addition to his work with the pro-bond group Friends of Wake County, Goodnight sent an e-mail message to thousands of employees in his Cary company, SAS Institute, asking them to support the measure.

After a Feb. 23 article in The N&O detailed the land's purchase price and sales history, Wake County commissioners and others became concerned that the school board was paying too much. The commissioners must approve such land purchases before they become final.

Goodnight could not be reached Tuesday night. He declined to be interviewed about the deal in February but said through an intermediary that any profit he gained from the sale would be refunded to the school system.

Rep. Paul Stam, R-Wake, was among those who thought the $8.7 million figure was far too high. A real estate lawyer who lives in Apex, Stam hired a certified appraiser of commercial property to make an independent evaluation of the site. The appraiser determined the land was worth about $3.8 million.

Stam then made the appraisal available to county officials, who then passed it on to the school board. Skeptical school administrators quickly hired a second appraiser to value the property.

Copies of those appraisals, which are public records under state law, were among the items requested from the school system on June 7. Michael Evans, the director of communications for the school system, did not respond to calls Tuesday asking when they would be made available.

A copy of the April 10 appraisal commissioned by the system was provided by school board member Ron Margiotta, however. It shows that the value of the Apex Olive property at $4.3 million -- less than half the price the school board agreed to pay.

"There's an awful lot of unanswered questions about how this happened, especially considering some of the people involved," said Margiotta, who is from Apex.

More scrutiny likely

The fallout from the derailed deal is likely to lead to scrutiny of those who stood to benefit.

When it started looking for land near Apex to build schools, the school board hired Coldwell Banker Commercial Trademark Properties, a Raleigh real estate company. Trademark brought the Apex Olive tract to the school system's attention and helped determine what was a fair market price.

Trademark is owned by its president, Billie Redmond, a well-regarded local broker. Redmond also serves as the co-chairwoman of the Citizens' Facilities Advisory Committee, a group appointed by Wake commissioners and charged with helping the school system spend its bond money in a cost-efficient manner.

Ed Bonner, the chief executive officer of Trademark Properties, was also an active member of Friends of Wake County. Bonner spoke in favor of the bonds at several public forums and locally televised debates.

If the sale of the Apex Olive property to the school system had been finalized, Trademark Properties would have received commissions in excess of $250,000.

Redmond said Tuesday she saw no problem with her service on the advisory committee and her company's contract to help the school system buy land. The same went for Bonner, she said.

"Ed is a civic-minded individual with two children in the Wake schools," Redmond said. "I think it is clear that my company acted in good faith. There is no conflict here."

Redmond said the recommended purchase price for the Apex Olive property was arrived at after an exhaustive review of comparable sales in the Apex area.

The two independent appraisals performed by certified firms were just wrong, she said.

"We didn't just pick that price," said Redmond, who was recently named Realtor of the Year by the Triangle Association of Realtors. "We worked very hard. We reviewed reams of in-depth information."

Goodnight and his wife, Ann Goodnight, were named Tar Heels of the Year by The N&O in December. Redmond was named a Tar Heel of the Week by the newspaper in September 2000.

Margiotta, the school board member, said questions about the land sale are not likely to die with the abandonment of the deal. And under an agreement approved Tuesday, Trademark will continue to be retained by the system to help find other sites to build schools.

"I don't know if anything illegal happened here, but it smells to high heaven," Margiotta said. "This isn't over."

...

Now, now. Don't go spreading the truth. Jim Martin is doing his best to rewrite this story on his Facebook page - along with many others.

"- there are thousands of

"- there are thousands of small ways that a school's siting and construction will impact day-to-day education. The district knows them all; the county knows none."

In therory, that's correct....in reality, not so much. Clearly, the folks at WCPSS aren't that much more knowledgable in this regard than your average citizen. Also, to presume the average CC has no knowledge of such things is also not true. Both are equally susceptible to politics corrupting the site selections which will ultimately trump the educational considerations made by both. So...no loss there.

Eh...

I don't know why your first statement (about knowledge of WCPSS staff) is true.

I agree that politics can interfere with site selection, but I have yet to see the school district try to build a school in a flood plain, for example. The school board has a much stronger incentive to site and build appropriate schools -- the county commissioners have a strong incentive to cut corners. (If for no other reason than to prove that they can do a 'better' job than the school board.)

Personally, though, I'm not really that wrapped up on this -- I think the long-term trend in the county is toward charter schools, and this argument just won't matter. Those babies being born today will have many more options when they're old enough for school.

Well...I don't think WCPSS

Well...I don't think WCPSS has done a particularly good job a distribution of schools or planning for future development, land purchases, etc. I don't think it has been a disaster but in many instances it could have been much better. I think most half decently educated people could have and could do at least as good a job....and that's my point.

I also agree with you that this will much less of an issue in the future due to charter schools. That's even more reason to pass the duties over to the CC's. We don't need a bunch of full time staff over at WCPSS working on this. The CCs could just hire some consultants every few years to look into what's needed, the best site and construction and be done with it. There is certainly no need for the BOE to be involved in that.

I know you have your beef with the CC with regard to funding of schools but I really think they have the same incentive which is to keep voters happy. If they screw up the placement or construction of the next HS, that will certainly not help them at the ballot box. Also, I don't think the funds they haven't given the district over the last few years has caused any problems for WCPSS. WCPSS does have a resources issue, they have an inappropriate distribution of resources issue. A few extra millions each year won't fix that and may even make it worse.

So...

The CC have a valid claim that the district's real estate procurement people do a really lousy job of negotiating the best price for property. There have been a number of cases where the district contracts to buy property, then the county is able to negotiate a better price.

Unfortunately, I think that's become a self-fulfilling prophecy: sellers know that the commissioners always say no to the first offer, so they leave some money on the table so they can agree to a lower number.

Options for...

the people who can afford the additional costs of charter schools, that is. As always (like in the choice plan or neighborhood schools plan), it is the poor who are going to get stuck with the worst choices and outcomes.

You seem to be suggesting that ED students can't go charter

You seem to be suggesting that ED students can't go to charter schools. Here's what I'm wondering -

If you Google and look outside the limited world of Wake, you can find a number of cites that on the whole charters largely reflect the general population and have similar demographics to traditional public districts or serve a higher portion of ED students than traditional public schools (depending on geographic area being considered). Also, a number of high schools cited as having high performance for ED students are charters that are predominantly ED.

So, how can this be happening if ED students can't go to charter schools? From where are all those charters in the various cites getting ED students if ED students can't go to charter schools?

they already

get s*&t on a stick from WCPSS. We have the some of the lowest achievement for ED kids in the state. Without an education where are they going to be at 18? At 30? We are so focused on skin color and address that we can't bother to educate children who need it the most, the kids who don't have a financial safety net.
They can't get any more screwed than they are now under the democrats.

News Flash to bpuli,Under

News Flash to bpuli,

Under the former (and future) diversity policy, the poor were stuck with the worst choices and outcomes! Please explain to me how the poor had worse or more costly choices under the Democrat scrapped choice plan than the former forced busing plan? Even when ED students were bused to supposedly "better" schools deep in the suburbs, their outcomes were more often than not WORSE than their peers attending higher %ED schools.

I'm going to say this again and again because it simply cannot be said enough...People who use the excuse that they can't send their kid to a charter school because they don't offer lunch or busing service either (A) don't really care enough or (B) think the public school their child currently attends is just fine or (C) both.

"People who use the excuse

"People who use the excuse that they can't send their kid to a charter school because they don't offer lunch or busing service either (A) don't really care enough or (B) think the public school their child currently attends is just fine or (C) both."

That's a very easy thing to say from the comfort of the suburbs.

Life is not easy for

Life is not easy for anyone....it's the people who don't make excuses that are successful.

?????

Poverty puts real barriers in place, I agree that they are not insurmountable, but they are there. The truth lies somewhere in the middle of this debate.
I am going to use those two women who recently wrote the book about hunger in the US as an example. We have a nutrition problem, an 'education about nutrition' problem, a healthcare access problem, a healthy food access problem. We don't have a hunger problem like we did 50 years ago. The extreme left wants to think we have a hunger problem and the extreme right wants to think we have a laziness problem. In reality we do have a problem that needs to be solved through a combination of private-public partnerships. People can't eat healthy when they don't have transportation/access to a grocery store. Just like work - it is hard to work when you don't have transportation.

When people are taken care

When people are taken care of completely, they forget or never learn how to take care of themselves. It's really no different than feeding the bears in Yellowstone....they will become dependent on that food, forget how to feed themselves and die in the winter when no one comes to feed them.

I'm not against helping people get on their feet once or even twice but constant and perpetual help is not help at all. It actually does more damage than good.

We definitely have a nutritional problem in this country but that is not limited by any means to the poor. I know many well educated people who feed their kids crap all day long and wonder why they have behavior issues. Our school lunch programs generally serve very poor nutritional quality food. That's one main reason I make 4 lunches every morning. Three for my kids and one for me. I don't like it and it really gets old but it saves $100's each year and provides my kids a solid, nutritional lunch.

We absolutely have a laziness problem in the US and that too is not limited to the poor. Laziness in one of the main reasons we have a nutritional problem. Parents are too lazy to cook a good dinner every night even though nearly everyone has a microwave. I can vividly remember the day my parents got their first microwave. Compared to our parent's generation, we're all a bunch of sloughs. Poor people have 1000x greater access to groceries than they did 20 years ago. There are very few places in WC where people don't have access to groceries. In addition, recent studies show that most "poor" people in the US own a car! I have no doubt that there are a few really destitute people in WC but the vast majority are simply irresponsible and lazy. Many or most of those have been trained to be that way by too much government entitlements.

?

You mean because the charters don't provide lunch or transportation?

I dispute that the lunch thing is a big problem. If you're on F&R lunch, there's a good chance you're already on food stamps. Fact is, though, that poor students were going to school long before

As to transportation, I'd be all for a law that requires school districts to transport kids to charter schools, although I guess that those who most worry about poor students would have an even bigger problem with that.

Frankly, I think that the solution is more charters. Some of the proposed charters target low-income students. The more charter schools we get, the more such schools will be created.

Maybe you should...

look up the percentages of the F&R students at Raleigh Charter (and other North Raleigh charters) that have been around for a while. And compare them to other high schools.

And I particularly like the statement you make about some charters targeting low-income students. Nice. Special schools for the low-income students. Followed by special schools for the rich, I suppose - but they already exist.

?

We're not talking about forcing kids into different schools. Charters are by application - I don't know why you'd want to tell low - income parents that they can't send their child to a school which they think will best meet his needs. WCPSS would just put the kids on an hour long bus ride to a distant school so he can fail anonymously.

I am happy....

you think poverty is not a barrier to anything.

?

When did I say that? I just don't buy this idea that poor people are incapable of making good decisions for their kids. And, I don't buy the idea that poor kids are well served by our current school system. If anything, they are the most in need of alternatives.

Of course it is a barrier

Of course it is a barrier but handing over free money and other stuff doesn't help! We've tried that for 60 years and it hasn't helped! The fact is, we can't afford to do stuff that doesn't work anymore...time to try something else.

If you want to do something about reducing the barrier that poverty presents, let these kids get the hell out of your crappy, failing schools. Some people, even when presented with the option, will not take the opportunity. Those people will remain poor and we will have a certain segment living in poverty until the end of time.

Those schools you speak of DO exist

And Martin, Hill, Evans, Kushner, Fletch and GSIW all support each and every one of them.

They're called magnets!

Yep...yep and yep. Any

Yep...yep and yep.

Any parent who really gives a darn will find a way. The lunch argument is completely bogus. Even if not in good stamps, a decent lunch can be prepared for a $1.50 per day or less. Many charter schools also have carpool networks in place to help with transportation. I am also supportive of the transportation money being attached to the kid as well. Heck...lets just attach the lunch money to but hand it to the kid instead of the school.

...

Hmmm... After calling one of them a jerk and bad mouthing them on Facebook and at public meetings (yes, you, Mr. Martin), I'm not sure the Commissioners should negotiate their position.

Sutton said during the Crabtree interview that the School Board should have been able to meet privately with the Commissioners (which is against the Open Meetings laws). And then went on to explain to Crabtree that the School Board's discussion is altered when cameras aren't around. Uh, like STFU and kickin' asses?

The commissioners didn't ask if they want to cut a deal

This one isn't up to this school board or their tax paid for lobbyist.

The majority of tax payers believe relegating this school board to the sidelines is exactly what needs to take place and the sooner the better.

Cars View All
Find a Car
Go
Jobs View All
Find a Job
Go
Homes View All
Find a Home
Go

Want to post a comment?

In order to join the conversation, you must be a member of newsobserver.com. Click here to register or to log in.

About the blogger

T. Keung Hui covers Wake schools.
Advertisements