The Wake County school system is a big issue for the three Republican candidates running in the District 2 primary for county commissioner.
Former Commissioner Phil Jeffreys, who had run-ins with the old school board during his previous tenure, is hoping to regain his seat. His GOP challengers are former Garner Alderman Phil Matthews and Raleigh real estate agent Champ Claris.
The winner will take on Democratic incumbent Lindy Brown in November. At stake could be which party controls the board of commissioners during a time in which the new school board majority will be trying to implement community schools.
Jeffreys could run into trouble with some voters for his support of operating the entire district on a multi-track year-round calendar to save on capital costs.
"Using published 2005 numbers, WCPSS could save over 38,000 seats utilizing a multi track year-round system," Jeffreys writes on his website. "This is a significant statistic."
Jeffreys is portraying himself as ahead of his time. He notes that all the statements on his website about more vocational schools, greater use of year-round schools and dividing the county into community attendance areas were what was written during his 2005 campaign.
Jeffreys was endorsed in the GOP Primary by the liberal Independent weekly.
"Jeffreys, who calls himself a young 72, isn't afraid to say that the Religious Right has too much influence in the Republican Party, which should resist policies based on dogma rather than facts," according to the Indy. "He could be a refreshing, if cantankerous voice on the Wake Commissioners board should he be elected over Brown."
Matthews doesn't go into quite as much discussion about schools as Jeffreys on his website.
"I will work with the school board to insure children in Wake County get the education they deserve," Matthews writes on his website. "I support year round schools, but not that they should be mandatory. I support community school assignment that encourages parental involvement. "
Claris, who unsuccessfully ran for Raleigh City Council last year, is joining his primary opponents in calling himself a fiscal conservative. He's stressing his real estate background as helping should he be elected.
"It is a huge responsibility of the Wake County Commissioners to support our school board through funding as well as helping in the site selection and construction management of new schools," Claris writes on his website. "As a real estate agent I see everyday the importance a strong public school system plays in attracting talented people and their families to our area. As a commissioner, I will forge a strong working relationship with our school board and will strive to make our public schools a place where our children thrive along with our teachers."
UPDATE
Click here for Thursday's article by Thomas Goldsmith about the race.
Comments
Off topic
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 13:20 — louiselee44but happened to see this:
Parents for Educational Freedom in NC (PEFNC) is hosting this "town hall" format discussion:
Identifying Real Solutions for the K-12 Educational Achievement Gap
Date: May 6, 2010 - 6:30pm
Location: Peace College: Kenan Recital Hall
15 East Peace StreetRaleighNC27604
That's all I know...
More information
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:55 — lferreri"Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina invites you to join elected officials, business leaders, public and nonpublic school leaders for a town hall discussion on the subject of K-12 education across the state.
Designed to engage community leaders and families, the event will explore the challenges of adequately educating all children, particularly low-income and minority students, whose performance scores reflect the state's troublesome achievement gap and high dropout rate.
The town hall format will enable parents and community leaders to share opinions and questions about K-12 education across all sectors--traditional public schools, public charter schools and nonpublic schools."
This seems to be a group advocating for charter schools. I received the information from the KIPP school in Charlotte. Someone from the KIPP Charlotte school is going to be on the panel over there. I'm not sure about who will be appearing in Raleigh.
Thanks for posting.
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 13:23 — Dove314Thanks for posting.
Hi Harry, Seems to me that
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 11:00 — CaryCurmudgeonHi Harry,
Seems to me that the plan is to retain YR schools, on a voluntary basis. I think that is great. The two candidates' positions on the MYR issue are still important to me. Phil Jeffreys' tells me that he cannot be counted on to support anything above survival-level funding for our schools. Brown's tells me that she doesn't abide by promises (remember, MYR was a huge issue in 2006).
Survival-level funding is
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 12:13 — user12345Survival-level funding is what we have been living with for many years ... or does he mean bare life support with a few schools dying along the way?
Two of these candidates had
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 09:35 — CaryCurmudgeonTwo of these candidates had three positions on MYR. When Jeffrys was Commissioner, he said that he thought ALL schools in Wake County should be MYR. As a candidate, Lindy Brown tapped into anti-MYR sentiment and promised not to support conversions (I voted for her because of that). Day one she did the Lindy Flip, aligned with her fellow Dems, and did nothing to support the citizens in their fight against MYR. I, for one, won't forget.
Tony Gurley supported MYR
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 13:41 — WhalerCaneJoe,
Don't forget that Tony Gurley voted for MYR before he oppossed it.
Perry
...
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 17:14 — SideburnsYes, but Gurley voted for the YR conversions with the understanding that families who couldn't make that calendar work would be given viable traditional calendar options. The BOE at the time (namely Patti Head who was the Chair) reneged on that part of the deal.
What? It was called
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 19:58 — WhalerCaneWhat? It was called 'Mandatory Year Round' when Gurley voted for it. Yet, old BoE still did give traditional calender option. I get that many did not like that option, but it was an option.
BTW, all this choice we are somehow about to be blessed with is going to cost a bunch of money, and still doesn't addess the so called issue, achievement gap and graduation rates amond Economically Disadvantaged Students.
Oh yea, we just closed Project Enlightenment. I guess they do not matter afterall.
...
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 20:41 — SideburnsShow me where they were called "mandatory" year round conversions during the discussion period.
And, are you sure about your assessment of PE?
WhalerCane, didn't you work
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 20:37 — DrActualFactualWhalerCane, didn't you work with FOWC folks to pass the bond? IRT Project Enlightenment, they can still get grant funding from other sources; they should not have put all their eggs in one basket--especially for funding.
Puuuleeze
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 19:22 — duvalJust because you decide that you want to go to school A but your choice is school B does not make it undesireable.
And...Leesville parents screamed for Hilburn and got it...then never attended.
So, is choice more important or having the school you want the way you envision it?
.
Thu, 04/29/2010 - 09:45 — Bob_SconceSorry, double-posted somehow.
Heh...
Thu, 04/29/2010 - 09:45 — Bob_SconceSchool B becomes undesirable when it's 20 minutes away and you have to pass schools C, D, E & F to get there.
...
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 19:42 — SideburnsI didn't say anything about "undesirable". Your word, not mine.
I chose school B after my base school A was converted to MYR. But then that option was changed to school C the following year. Ridiculous.
they "got it" AFTER the
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 19:33 — AngelaWthey "got it" AFTER the feeder middle school was forced MYR.....there is even LESS desirability to a YR middle than ES so why opt-out to a Trad ES (Hilburn)only to go back to MYR middle as was the case back then.
Is that a reverse
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:39 — Dove314Is that a reverse lindy-flop?
maybe a pirrouette?
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:53 — CaryCurmudgeonmaybe a pirrouette?
Hi Mudge
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 10:43 — hmoncelleHarry_Moncelle
With the new board majority isn't MYR no longer in effect? I am unclear as to what the new direction on YR is going to be. Do you have any ideas?
The new board said that
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 11:30 — DrActualFactualThe new board said that every effort would be made to place people who wanted to opt-out of MYR (I believe). Then, I think GM told them space would be a concern at some campuses so I'm not certain how that affected the actual computer generation of the applications for this year. I don't know if Mr. Hui has received and published the results of the magnet/calendar placements for this year yet.
I don't have the new numbers
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:51 — KeungHui (author)I don't have the new numbers yet.
The Old Board
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 11:42 — FrabjousThe old board placed every who chose to opt out of their base YR in a traditional calendar school. It's just that not everyone chose to opt-out if their base was YR.
The old board didn't place
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:53 — KeungHui (author)The old board didn't place out everyone. Some were turned down. The same things will happen this year but I believe there was an increase in the number of tradtional-calendar applicants after some of the opt-out choices changed.
How many were turned down
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 15:13 — carson79How many were turned down under the old board? or do you know if this information is available?
143 last year
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 15:24 — KeungHui (author)143 last year
My Bad
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 15:54 — FrabjousHere's a link to a story with the numbers from last year.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2009/04/15/79423/most-applicants-placed-at-wake.html?storylink=misearch
Still 95% of traditional applicants were place while 77% of YR applicants were placed.
23% of 3887 is about 894 students who were denied YR seats.
I hear ya. We were one of
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 12:09 — DrActualFactualI hear ya. We were one of those stuck in MYR that didn't want to be there. The opt out choices didn't feed to the HS we have to attend. In hindsight it would have been far better for us to have taken the opt-out as it was the calendar that we really needed.
In fact, new board said they
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 13:44 — WhalerCaneIn fact, new board said they could eliminate MYR because we didn't really have MYR because old board had granted opt outs. Of course last year, any time someone suggested we didn't really have MYR, they were called liars. So even though they were saying the same thing, old board were liars, and new board are heros.
Perspectives are funny.
So...
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:07 — Bob_SconceTechnically, MYR was never completely mandatory -- you could apply to opt-out into some distant traditional-calendar schools that was selected to be as unappealing as possilble.
The reason the old board got called out and the new board doesn't is that the old board had its collective head up its collective rear-end, thinking (or, at least, asserting) that it was giving reasonable traditional options. Heck, they wouldn't have even provided those unreasonable options had they not been forced to by Judge Manning. The new board understands that the traditional options aren't reasonable, and is working to correct the situation.
THe old board also got called out because it ignored the people who were denied their traditional-calendar option.
LOL,
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 20:06 — WhalerCaneBob,
I bet you a Steak Dinner many are still not happy with their traditional option, and another dinner that in an effort to make people happy with their option, as many will be put out by its impact.
Doesn't change that a double standard exists. If it was really about working for what's best for our entire community, it wouldn't matter which Board said the same thing. It's just you are politically connected to the new Board, so you will get what you want.
So...
Thu, 04/29/2010 - 09:56 — Bob_SconceConsidering that the new board hasn't substantially changed the traditional options, yes, I'd say that lots of people are still unhappy. And, people are generally put out by change, period. So, it's important to get the changes right the first time.
You cannot deny that the old board initially didn't want to offer traditional calendar options at all, and only did so after being forced to by Judge Manning. You also can't deny that its year-round plans would have been turned inside out had substantial numbers of students opted out of their year-round schools. So, they clearly didn't go out of their way to make the traditional alternatives attractive.
I don't think I'm politically connected to the new board. If I am, it certainly didn't help to get the biggest thing that I wanted -- Wakefield ES on a traditional calendar.
The sad thing is
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:04 — FrabjousThe sad thing is more kids apply for year round seats than there are YR seats available. Yet the board, in the past, has always been able to provide traditional seats for those who wish to opt out of YR.
All the complaining about MYR and there are more kids whose parents want YR seats than there are available YR seats in the county.
Hummmm........ It sounds
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:18 — shearertwHummmm........
It sounds good to through that out there but I don't believe that's accurrate and I don't believe you have data to prove it either. The problem is, I believe, is that there are too may YR seats in certain areas and too few YR seats in others. The YR seats are not equally distributed (and by default, neither are the traditional seats). The old board said they were willing to provide a traditional seat for whom effort wanted to opt out but the those opt out options were often very undesirable (for a number of reasons). It appeared as if the trad. opt out options were intentionally made undesirable to keep the number of applicants down. That's an effective MYR in my book. The current BOE is stuck with the old BOE's YR school placement and it will take some time undo that mess. Some trad schools probably need to be converted to YR while some YR's need to be converted to traditional to equal out the distribution of YR and traditional seat to where they are need...... but that's a difficult proposition at the moment. This has occurred because the old BOE felt they could just assign people where ever the H E double hockey sticks they wanted to. The new BOE (majority) believes there should be some limits to that. Thanks old BOE! What a mess.
yes, the truth of the matter
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 18:37 — AngelaWyes, the truth of the matter is the old VOLUNTARY way of YR worked for years in WCPSS, it was MYR that was the disaster and the catalyst, IMHO. and it was the OLD BoE that forced MYR... the new BoE is left to clean up that mess.
yep
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 17:12 — louiselee44...and even during the "voluntary" YR years, some students were still assigned to YR without volunteering.
YEP
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 18:42 — magnetParentBecause a group of parents complained that it was not fair that the YR schools did not have base assignment areas.
Think way back.