The online reaction to last night's Wake County school board vote by groups who supported the diversity policy is predictably unhappy.
In an online post this morning, the liberal N.C. Social Justice Project is calling the board majority's vote "disgusting" and "painful." The group says the majority "repeatedly tossed aside the concerns of those in the minority" by rejecting the various amendments that would have called for trying to limit the percentage of poor students at schools.
"In my many years of watching political bodies debate and vote, it was one of the most disgusting displays of blatant partisanship I have ever seen," according to the NCSJP post. "To call this current Board a deliberative body is wishful thinking, to say the least."
NCSJP says the answer of what to do next is to focus on this year's races for county commissioner.
"I promise that this year you will know your Commissioners by name," according to the NCSJP. "Never underestimate the power of the purse."
Comments
I would have started with
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 13:49 — user12345I would have started with 90% to see if the majority was even interested in preventing warehousing poor kids ... the actual number - 40% or 90% is not important since it can be adjusted over time ... what is important is a desire prevent building schools of poverty ...
I found it disturbing that McLaurin-Meeker was willing to bargain using the children of Wake County. When Tedesco pointed out that the "50%" on the amendment was hand-written, McLaurin-Meeker said that number was negotiable. Sutton even chimed in and said "How about 60?". It was sad, even somewhat embarrassing, to watch..
Zero Tolerence...
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 14:10 — Bob_SconceI think it just shows that they're not interested in assigning students based on how much the parents make. Once you include any number in there, that's what you're doing.
And, as you said, it "can be adjusted over time." We've seen what government does when you open a door like that -- Social Security started off being a modest supplement but was "adjusted over time" and, as a result, is now a huge (and bankrupt) part of the federal budget
Zero-tolerance and unwilling to compromise
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 16:03 — Athey01We are right, they are wrong. We have the power, no need to compromise, no need to discuss, no need to listen, no need to analyze, no need to obtain additional information, let's vote. We are doing what we were elected to do. They will thank us later.
My perception of the new majority, excluding Ms Goldman.
For a minute there, I
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 17:09 — shearertwFor a minute there, I thought you were talking about Rosa Gill. Maybe I just had a flashback.
I agree, the old board failed in many ways, but it would be
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 21:35 — Athey01refreshing if the new majority did not repeat the same mistakes.
Throwing them a bone is all they were asking for. In negotiations, the primary objective is to achieve a "win-win", but thus far, the majority is taking no prisoners. Just a personal observation.
"Throwing them a bone is all
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 22:18 — woodstock"Throwing them a bone is all they were asking for. In negotiations, the primary objective is to achieve a "win-win", but thus far, the majority is taking no prisoners."
-------------------------
Conceding that the at-risk model of education should be a factor is not a win-win, it would be a return to a failed premise.
don't exclude Goldman; she
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 17:08 — jeannie84don't exclude Goldman; she stepped out of line once, but they've effectively beaten her back into compliance
I agree, but
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 21:26 — Athey01at least she listens and ask questions. When i watched the live stream of the board meetings, how many questions or even comments were made by Chris Malone...less than a handful... how many questions or comments by Ms Prickett... a little more than a handful... Mr Tedesco, no questions, only statements.
NCSJP-they care- they have a pic of a black kid on their website
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 13:14 — fiestamomThis is what liberal social justice looks like: They don't DO anything! This is what they describe on their own website
" By researching data, talking to policy makers, and consulting experts in the field, NCSJP is able to present our findings to the public"
They DO NOTHING to help poor black kids, how does presenting their findings put food on a poor kids plate? How does researching data help a poor kid to read?
These kinds of organizations
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 13:30 — woodstockThese kinds of organizations are just boondoggles, a waste of time, money and energy. You are right, they DO NOTHING... but they sure like to point out what others are not doing to their satisfaction.
Hey Woody
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 13:09 — hmoncelleHarry_Moncelle
I was at the board meeting last night. I found it sad that in one breath John T and the gang say, come on join with us help us craft the new policy. When honest attempts are put forward to do that by putting up some compromise to the vision the ideologues brush them off.
It appears to me that the NCSJP speaks the truth. The Ultra Conservative Tea Partier John T and the gang care only about the privileged, well off white suburban middle class who demonstrate no commitment to social responsibility in civic affairs, desire all the benefits of excellent public schools for their children but don’t want their taxes raised to pay for this and blame “liberals” for all the wrongs on the planet.
The actions I witnessed last night continue to reinforce my judgment that a small minded, mean spirited, Republican backed ultra conservative group of activitist has hijacked our school board. When John T was asked about the neighborhood schools he just sat there, made no attempt to reply and explain what his plan was. The Ultra Conservatives have demonstrated they do not want to look at facts and figures they would rather rule by decree.
"What comes around goes
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 21:53 — zande"What comes around goes around." The chair will have a really tough time at re-election this year. I can't wait to contribute my time and treasure to his defeat.
This blog must be totally populated by ppl who do not pay for the paper so they read it on line. (oh, let me guess.. the N and O is so liberal that you cancelled your subscription when this story or that story came out...) I would say the radical right wing is alive and well on the newsobserver.com blogs. There must be 15 right wing posts for every other post. This is waaay too much fun.
So, you enjoy having your
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 22:26 — woodstockSo, you enjoy having your arguments shot down. Interesting.
For your own sake, I hope
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 22:04 — CaryCurmudgeonFor your own sake, I hope you worked equally hard to contribute your "time and treasure" during the last election -- I'm sure given you displeasure with the current board it would tear you up to look back and wonder if you could have made a difference.
So
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 19:16 — TrailerParkGirlSo, according to you - John T, who grew up ED and has worked with primarily ED kids much of his adult life, only cares about the privileged, well off white suburban middle class. Does that really make logical sense to you?
Do you really not get it when he says he has a problem with telling low-income kids they're not good enough to go to a school in their community if that is what they and their families want? I guess not because you don't have a problem with telling them they cannot go to school in their own community. You consider it your social responsibility to decide that for them by limiting how many of "them" can be allowed in one school as if that is some magic bullet, not to mention the fact that it hasn't worked when it was at 40%. What will magically change if the 40% becomes 50% or 55% or whatever "negotiated" percent? Once again, focusing on F&R percentages is the ONLY solution offered up. That is what we've been doing and it hasn't worked, changing the % won't change that. If people could move off the F&R% obsession and start looking at other factors we might get somewhere.
John T has explained his vision multiple times, including an 1+ hour long presentation to the BOE members. If Morrison hasn't gotten it after all that I don't know what else he is expected to say about it. It is sort of like when the teacher asked me to try to explain how to balance a chemical equation to the NED kid who sat next to me in Chemistry because he didn't get it the first three times the teacher explained it. He didn't get it the fourth time either, just like some people here will never get problems with the so-called "diversity" policy.
John T use of buzz words/terms can be confusing
Thu, 05/20/2010 - 06:28 — Athey01When a teacher explains something using the same words each time, the student may not understand. Therefore, rather than repeating the same words slower, a good teacher explains in a different manner, or uses different examples, or performs a demonstration of what they are trying to teach. It may be helpful for John T to do the same. Also, slowing down his cadence may help.
JT's vision has never been
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 22:00 — zandeJT's vision has never been paid for. He never said where we would get the money to do what he has promised. He also said twice "This is not the plan."So... what is the plan??
There is a difference
Thu, 05/20/2010 - 01:23 — TrailerParkGirlThere is a difference between a vision and a plan.
A "vision" is your inspiration and is the framework for your planning. The vision speaks to where you want to go. It doesn't tell you how you are going to get there, but sets the direction for the planning, which will result in a "plan".
Vision is community zones and regions with choice using algorithm and including magnet and theme schools.
The plan is to be developed over the 9-15 months with stakeholder input. The plan is the details - how many zones and regions, mapping out the zones and regions, how many magnets and their programs and locations, how many theme schools and their programs and locations, what factors will be included in the algorithm and how will they be weighted, etc.
In JT's presentation he gave samples of what parts of a plan might look like, but was trying to be clear that they were just samples (i.e. not THE plan) as the actual plan is TBD through the 9-15 month process.
IMO a vision is not something that is reasonable to estimate. In order to estimate costs and savings, the details (i.e. the actual plan) have to be worked out. Otherwise, it's just a SWAG, therefore meaningless, and then people would be jumping all over that. The only way you are going to have all the answers right now is if a few people decide on THE plan right now without input, which would be cause for concern.
But shouldn't there be some
Thu, 05/20/2010 - 07:04 — danofncBut shouldn't there be some idea of costs along the way?
Don't we have to know that we can afford to implement the plan? Cost has to be a part of the planning process.
That is an outstanding
Thu, 05/20/2010 - 07:00 — woodstockThat is an outstanding explanation. Very well stated!
Nope, he really doesn't get it!
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 20:18 — SupportNeighbor...He also doesn't get that many of these ED families actually WANT to stay in their neighborhood schools. Instead he believes he knows what's best for these families, more than the families themselves.
Diversity supporters - Why do you think it's just ITB residents, white magnet parents, white magnet students, and special interest groups with a political agenda who are fighting so hard for the ED families. (And PLEASE don't use the pathetic argument that they don't have transportation to get to the meetings - COPOUT.) Isn't it time that we stop assuming what they want and need, and stop pretending we are speaking for them?
LOL @ Harry. Feel
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 13:33 — woodstockLOL @ Harry. Feel better?
I must admit I am a little confused why you feel the need to share your vivid fantasy life with us. Oh, well, to each his own.
I'm still looking for
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 12:32 — shearertwI'm still looking for someone to define "social justice". Perhaps some of you hear could help me with that. I went to the NCSJP website and I did find some vague reference around eliminating "widespread social inequality among traditionally under-represented groups".
Then I found this quote:
"Spending isn't the problem and we can't cut our way to prosperity - reforming the fundamental way North Carolina collects revenue is absolutely critical to our State's economic health."
Spending isn't the problem? Who in the heck still believes that?
That's when I realized what they were all about, and possibley the definition of "social justice".....taking my hard earned money and giving it to someone else they deem more worthy to have it.
I also noticed they called themselves a non-partisan group. I'm still cleaning up the sweet tea I sprayed all over my monitor when I read that.
HOW DARE the ultra liberal
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 12:45 — woodstockHOW DARE the ultra liberal N.C. Social Justice Project even make reference to "the various amendments that would have called for trying to limit the percentage of poor students at schools." The status quo, even with thousand upon thousands of student reassignments every year, created schools with 50%, 60%, 70% -- and beyond -- poverty rates.
When Ann McLaurin-Meeker presented an amendment asking for no more than 50% poverty she should have been laughed right out of the room. When asked what she meant by "poor children," she could not even define it?
What is beyond disgusting is the appalling ultra left-wing Democrat effort to make our children's access to educational resources a political issue.
...
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 13:37 — SideburnsI found it disturbing that McLaurin-Meeker was willing to bargain using the children of Wake County. When Tedesco pointed out that the "50%" on the amendment was hand-written, McLaurin-Meeker said that number was negotiable. Sutton even chimed in and said "How about 60?". It was sad, even somewhat embarrassing, to watch.
"It was sad, even somewhat
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 17:05 — jeannie84"It was sad, even somewhat embarrassing, to watch."
Yes, it was: to watch Margiotta, Malone, Prickett, Goldman and Tedesco flatly refuse (again - multiple times) any and all efforts to compromise and build concensus by including diversity along with choice, stability and proximity in student assignment.
...
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 18:00 — SideburnsThere you go with that word "compromise" again. You've been hanging around Rhonda too much.
And I love the concensus building going on with Yvonne Brannon and crew. Yelling "bigot" isn't a very warm approach.
If by "embarrassing" you
Wed, 05/19/2010 - 17:12 — woodstockIf by "embarrassing" you mean like watching your football team win the Super Bowl, I agree.