Wake County school board member John Tedesco is sure sounding like he prefers the blue plan over the green plan for student assignment.
During an interview today on the Bill LuMaye Show on WPTF, Tedesco said he's open to hearing what the public has to say about both models. But he was far more enthusiastic in describing the blue plan, comparing it to both the plans developed by Michael Alves and the one he had been working on.
"I think the voters who elected me wanted to empower parents, empower proximity for neighborhood schools, empower more choice and more options when we had options like mandatory year-round in the community," Tedesco said "They wanted to reduce inefficiencies and remove the administrators from making decisions that parents should be making and I think the blue plan does lead to that more."
He called the blue plan "a new dynamic" that "turns the power over to the families," "with a promise of stability" and a K-12 feeder pattern. He touted how the blue plan would avoid reassignment by having new families go to schools with capacity instead of moving students around to deal with crowding and growth.
Tedesco also favorably contrasted how student achievement would be handled in the blue plan as compared to the green plan.
Tedesco said the green plan, which tries to keep schools within 10 percent of the district's average academic performance is, like the old diversity policy, "trying to make the schools look good."
But he said the blue plan answers the concerns from critics that going to a choice plan using proximity would result in many students not having access to great schools or good teachers.
"We've already went and evaluated the schools and the teachers across the district for the most highly effective teachers, the most National Board certified teachers, masters degree teachers, ranking them in terms of teacher quality, not the school's health as the other indicators had," he said. "In the choice selection for individuals, the individuals will be promised that at least one of their five choices will be a school that has the most effective teachers we have to offer."
Comments
As it turns out Tedesco was
Wed, 05/25/2011 - 15:35 — woodstockAs it turns out Tedesco was on the right path to begin with and was in the process of developing -- along with like-minded board members and an engaged community group -- something visionary and lasting... until Goldman dismantled the process for still unknown reasons then sequestered herself. The green plan is an absolute abomination and was obviously just an afterthought. The blue "choice" plan does possess some attractive attributes, but is is far from visionary and seems too much like an effort to please everyone regardless of the merits of doing so. It's pieced together, half-baked and not very well conceived... as is typical when there are too many cooks in the kitchen so to speak.
I agree
Wed, 05/25/2011 - 19:17 — SDR256I agree and in fact many of those you have disparaged agree with much of this assessment. Tedesco's plan was visionary. It took exactly the right priorities to heart. These plans are weak in comparison.
Um, Woodstock - may I shyly point out that some of the people most adamantly echoing exactly what you are conveying here - are the Democrats w/i WSCA? Don't want to scare you, or influence you - just want you to chew that cud.
You misunderstand, I KNOW
Wed, 05/25/2011 - 19:40 — woodstockYou misunderstand, I KNOW many members of WSCA are Democrats who agree with the change brought about by the new BoE members; I will even admit that WSCA helped get them elected. I never said otherwise. That is one reason that I refer to the oppsition as "extreme" left wingers, because I know most moderate Democrats oppose the status quo, forced busing and the bogus "diversity" nonsense as much as I do.
My problems with the organization is threefold: 1.) your insistance that your organization is apolitical when is clearly is not (admit it, you held your noses when you supported Republicans last time) 2.) your backing of an individual that will risk Hill retaining his board seat and 3.) the likelyhood that you will back another candidate to oppose Margiotta. The first one is merely irritating, but the other two are unacceptable to me... and I am someone who used to admire your mission. Now, as with Goldman, I don't even know what the hell it is.
My problems with the
Wed, 05/25/2011 - 22:02 — CaryCurmudgeonMy problems with the organization is threefold: 1.) your insistance that your organization is apolitical when is clearly is not (admit it, you held your noses when you supported Republicans last time)
You're confusing "apolitical" with "non-partisan." We have a PAC and understand that politics are a detestable but necessary part of the progress equation. Nobody "held their noses" in 2009, we backed the best candidates. Just like we are doing in 2011.
2.) your backing of an individual that will risk Hill retaining his board seat.
Jennifer Mansfield made it clear to the republican party that she was running in district 3 BEFORE anyone else announced. If anyone is guilty of creating risk, it is the Republican party and their arrogant belief that anyone not carrying an "R" in front of their name was unworthy of the party's endorsement.
3.) the likelyhood that you will back another candidate to oppose Margiotta.
WSCA will vet, endorse and support candidates for the 2011 elections. I have no idea what D8 has to do with D3, or Jennifer Mansfield in particular, yet you seem to be fixated on this. Any decisions on who to endorse in any district need to be made by our leadership committee. So any statements about [sic] "likelyhood" are your speculation and no one else's.
I don't even know what the hell it is.
So sayteh you.
I don't recall responding to
Wed, 05/25/2011 - 23:30 — woodstockI don't recall responding to you or asking you anything.
I am not confused about anything except the reason for the all the silly secrecy about your steering committee. However, YOU must be very confused (stupid or deceptive are also possibilities) if you do not see the relevancy of who is running and who WSCA may be opposing. You know as well as I do Mansfield will not win and she will risk having Hill retain his seat in the process.
Margiotta's endorsement should be an easy decision. Who on your super secret steering committee could possibly not want to support a man who has fought harder and longer than anyone for the change you and your organization claim to seek? Here is an easy question for you: What would YOUR decision be?
Did you actually point out a typo? LOLOL What a putz.
...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 06:41 — SideburnsPerhaps another WSCA steering committee member is preparing for a run in D8?
Oh good grief...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 07:16 — Bob_SconceWhat is it with you, innuendo and conspiracy? You're missing the big story here -- the reason Charles Meeker resigned and McLaurin is so coy about running in District 5 is that they're BOTH MOVING TO APEX so McLaurin can run against Ron in District 8. WSCA is clearly planning to endorse her.
(If you're going to start a rumor, at least start a good one....)
We'll be co-hosting the
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 08:26 — CaryCurmudgeonWe'll be co-hosting the campaign kickoff with Ncheat this weekend at Martin Street Baptist Church.
...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 08:06 — SideburnsBob, I could make a good rumor if I wanted. But, the fact is -- everything I've posted is stuff I've heard from friends (and not things like "X told me that Y said to Z that blah, blah, blah...but straight from the horse's mouth stuff) or read in emails. Believe what you want.
Would you believe it if I said Goldman wants to bury the hatchet with me? The truth really is stranger than fiction.
?
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 08:23 — Bob_SconceWell, you did just make a good rumor. How about the one that I mentioned and then retracted?
....
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 08:26 — SideburnsBut, do you believe it?
I think you mean your edited post -- in which case I already answered.
Huh?
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 10:14 — Bob_SconceWell, I'm still suspicious about the rumor I heard (which, let's get it out into the open since we're spreading these things, is that Ron may not be running after all and is looking for a successor). If there's some sort of health issue (which, incidentally, was not part of the rumor -- that's just me filling in the holes in the story, so don't add that onto the rumor), then that would explain a lot. It would also explain why everybody's being so mum about Ron's status.
As to Ron himself.... Well, there are some things that I really like and some, eh, not so much. For example, after the school board told the commissioners "WE don't need any more money," David Cook's reaction was "Great! Let's give all the county employees raises!" The district could have gotten a piece of that had the board simply asked for it. But, apparantly out of sheer obstinance, they didn't. Makes me wonder a little bit whether he really believes that strong public schools are a good thing.
On the other hand, I'm much happier with the overall direction of the board now than I was 3 years ago, and Ron had a lot to do with that.
....
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 17:23 — SideburnsWhat 'status' do you mean? Who's being mum? Ron's very accessbile. If 'everyone' wanted to know something, give him a call.
I'm glad to hear that, at the end of the day, you still support Ron. He's had a bumpy road but, all in all, you are right. We are all much happier with the overall direction of the Board and we owe a lot of that to him.
Well...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 21:11 — Bob_SconceRight now, of all the candidates in D8, he's the one I agree with the most. But, to me, that's all academic -- I'm in D3.
There's also a rumor that RM
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 11:53 — CaryCurmudgeonThere's also a rumor that RM is going to stand for election, then bestow his seat on a successor. I was told this by someone who knows RM personally. If his name is on the ballot I'd sure like to know whether he plans on serving out his term.
...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 15:47 — SideburnsOh, it's all so clear to me now. Thanks Joe.
WSCA thinks Ron wants to run, win the election and "bestow" his seat to me. No wonder you're not answering woodstock's question -- because his accusation is true. The only person you hate more than Ron is me -- or perhaps you despise us equally.
That is hysterical!
Um, you should check that
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 15:57 — CaryCurmudgeonUm, you should check that ego and just deal in facts. The WSCA steering committee will vote, in due time, on what to do in the remaining districts. Your venomous posts just help others understand why you were asked to leave. You're welcome to ask any committee member about what we're doing in other districts, you used to be on the committee so you don't need a list. Pick up the phone.
And FWIW, I do not think you do RM any favors by creating the impression that you would be his successor. Woodstock insists that we must have Republicans on the school board, and it simply wouldn't do to have a Dem appointed, right Woody?
...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 16:31 — SideburnsYeah, let's deal with facts.
Are you supporting Margiotta in D8? He is running. Who else on the steering committee won't support Margiotta? Are you actively searching for a D8 candidate? I heard maybe Sinkez. Is that true?
Sideburns
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 02:08 — WhalerCaneRM shut down his committee earlier this year and his house is for sale. That will tend to fuel speculation. Honestly, I wouldn't wish BoE on my worst enemy. Hasn't he done his time? As well, frankly he kind of makes an easy target, like Newt. I thought you liked Ron. You Should Step UP! I say that not that I think you are my worst enemy :-), but because you do give a crap. Or find someone else. In fact, the only chance someone I would support would have is if Ron runs. Part of me thinks it would be fun.
He's been there 8 years. He doesn't have to win re-election to prove anything. No one should be asked to sit in that snake pit any longer than that. Maybe here is a chance for you and Joe to find common ground. I'm just sayin'. Another Term might just kill Ron. Seriously.
Margiotta says he will run
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 17:52 — KeungHui (author)Margiotta says he will run again, as noted in today's post. He's planning to relocate within the district once his house sells. He's looking for a home that he thinks will better fit he and his wife's needs now.
That doesn't answer the
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 21:49 — CaryCurmudgeonThat doesn't answer the question of whether he plans on serving out his term, or appointing someone else to do so. Next time you talk to him, would you mind asking that question? Folks should know whether they are voting for RM, or a designee.
Keung
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 18:48 — WhalerCaneDid I scope you on his house being for sale? :-)
You're not the first person
Sun, 05/29/2011 - 15:44 — KeungHui (author)You're not the first person who has mentioned it to me. This is one of those difficult situations that border on whether it's worth blogging. If he had said he's planning on moving out of the district I would have blogged about it a lot sooner. There are valid personal reasons not related to the school board for why he'd want to move to a smaller home.
...
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 06:39 — SideburnsMight kill him? You're sick.
Margiotta is running. As everyone has seen in the past 8 years, he is truly dedicated to Wake County to fix the problems facing families throughout the system. He's not trying to prove anything and he certainly isn't looking for your approval. He's not looking for a successor. As he has the past 2 terms, he will be committed to serve his term.
But, this isn't about Margiotta. This was about who WSCA is running against him. And why they won't support him.
Wow, I articulate genuine
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 09:51 — WhalerCaneWow,
I articulate genuine concern for Ron's health, and you call me 'sick'. What I wrote was nothing but a 'torpedo of truth.'
I didn't say he wasn't dedicated. My point was serving on the BoE is not easy, and 8 years of purgatory is all anyone should be asked to do. Yes, four more years of this stress might just kill him? He is not exactly a sping chicken.
You are young. Not that Ron can't, but you would undoubtedly weather it better, and you two are pretty much in lock step on BoE issues. Why not save Ron the grief and put yourself forward. Apparently I care more about Ron's health than you do.
...
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 10:41 — SideburnsRon doesn't have health problems so you can drop the feigned concern. Or is that your schtick this time? How sad. I thought you were on the up-and-up.
I don't even know what a torpedo of truth is.
Sideburns It is not 'feigned
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 11:39 — WhalerCaneSideburns
It is not 'feigned concern'. Perhaps I'm overly sensitive to it seeing what Stan has been going through. I did not say Ron has health problems, but he is North of 70 I beleive, it is a stressful gig, and 8 years is a gracious plenty for anyone to serve on the BoE.
a 'Torpedo of Truth' is something that people may not want to or expect to hear, but is true. Aside from the truth that the gig is stressful, and will impact anyone's health, it is also true that the only way a non-neighborhood schools advocate has even a chance in that race is if Ron is on the ballot.
I do not know why you are mad at me. I merely suggested you would be a good candidate, and possible a better alternative to move the agenda you share with Ron forward.
...
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 13:04 — SideburnsDo you treat everyone over 70 that way? Please don't. It's insulting.
Unlike you, I have children to raise. My 'agenda' is to get that job done. I'm sure you can understand.
Even if under 70, 8 years on
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 14:41 — WhalerCaneEven if under 70, 8 years on the school board is a gracious plenty for anyone. That job is more stressful than serving in Congress or the legislature. I didn't mean to insult you by suggesting you might be a better candidate than Ron. Your children certainly come first.
Ageism? Really?!.... a new
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 12:33 — woodstockAgeism? Really?!.... a new low even for you.
Ageism would be "He can't do
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 12:34 — danofncAgeism would be "He can't do it because he's 70."
What was said, basically, is "He's 70. Why would he want the hassle?"
...
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 12:55 — SideburnsThe fact that you and Whaler have boiled it down to "Why would he want the hassle?" is just incredible.
No one would ever
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 09:56 — woodstockNo one would ever associate being "genuine" with Perry Woods. Your every utterance is intended to send a politically motivated message... to deceive or plant innuendo. Folks are on to you, cut the act.
You're starting to sound
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 07:52 — danofncYou're starting to sound like woodstock.
If Margiotta's house sells tommorrow, where is he planning to move? Has his new house always been in his district or is it in an area that is new to his district b/c of redistricting?
Since you know so much about Ron M's personal plans, I'm sure you know these answers, too.
...
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 10:35 — SideburnsNew house? What are you talking about?
I do know Margiotta well enough to know he'd accept a phonecall from you if you're really interested in his personal life.
His house is on the
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 10:48 — danofncHis house is on the market.
If it should sell, he'd then need a new house. I think that house would need to be in his district.
If he were to end up moving to a house that wouldn't have been in his district prior to redistricting, I would be very suspicious.
...
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 19:45 — SideburnsDid you figure that out all by yourself? He has to move if he sells his house? You're quick.
Being Snarky
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 22:19 — WhalerCanedoes not enhance your effectiveness. I like you, but I can't keep giving you all this free political advice. :-) I guess it is the Hack in me. I seem more concerned about your political future than you do. :-)
...
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 22:22 — SideburnsSorry. It must be snarky Friday.
Now that is funny. Have a
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 22:28 — WhalerCaneLOL. I know, sometimes we can't help it. Have a happy and safe Memorial Day weekend.
So the politically motivated
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 12:04 — woodstockSo the politically motivated innuendo begins from the "apolitical," and "non-partisan" leader of the WSCA. LOLOL What a hypocrite.
Is Perry Woods a member or your secret steering comittee?
Will WSCA support Ron Margiotta when he runs?
Your continued silence on both of these issues is revealing. It is interesting that the leader of the Wake Republicans is more forthcoming than your "grassroots" organization of "regular folks."
Well...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 12:33 — Bob_SconceAt minimum, it should be crystal clear whether an endorsement for Ron is actually an endorsement for somebody who intends to run and who intends to carry out his full term.
Perry's my best evidence that you can be a staunch partisan without being either an a**h**e or a lunatic.
That's funny. Perry just has
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 17:54 — woodstockThat's funny. Perry just has being an a$$#ole down to a science and is able to spew lies and vitriol like he's describing the weather. He's like the Southern bell who says "bless your little heart," when she really means I want to scratch your eyes out.
You seem to be very easily fooled.
Despite his line of work, I
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 18:38 — CaryCurmudgeonDespite his line of work, I actually think Perry is less partisan than you. No doubt he's a party-line guy, but he's at least willing to admit where the Dems screw up. You, on the other hand, are blindly loyal and have not to the best of my recollection openly disagreed with a single action or decision of the Republican 4. At least Perry is honest about who he is and what he does, he doesn't hide behind a nickname playing the pompous ass.
I am not surprised even
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 18:49 — woodstockI am not surprised even little that you've been duped by Woods. Goldman fooled you too.
More name calling. Really? LOL
STILL UNANSWERED QUESTIONS:
Is Perry Woods on the secret WSCA steering committee"
Is WSCA going to support Margiotta in his election bid?
Oh, a whole lot of us backed
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 19:13 — CaryCurmudgeonOh, a whole lot of us backed Goldman. The Republican party endorsed her, and I'm sure people will wonder if they're getting another Goldman when the Republicans endorse Losurdo. RM also backed Goldman, and he's now backing Losurdo -- should that make us worry even more? Keep digging your hole, you are not helping Heather out by prolonging this debate.
Here are the answers to your questions:
1. Perry Woods is not a member of WSCA. We do not have a "secret" committee, and we're always looking for people who are willing to help run our group. If you could ever drop your "Republican or die" attitude, I'm sure the group would be happy to talk to you about joining.
2. WSCA has made an endorsement in District 3. We are waiting to see who runs in the other districts before discussing endorsements.
...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 22:38 — SideburnsI'm sure people will wonder if they're getting another Goldman when the Republicans endorse Losurdo.
I would think people would be more concerned with Mansfield pulling a Goldman than Losurdo. Mansfield is a Democrat who can easily support the current Democratic Board members and say "But I'm a Democrat".
And the fact that the reason you're endorsing Mansfield is because she is not a Republican is just as political as the Republican party endorsing someone because they are.
I'd be glad to post a link
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 23:04 — CaryCurmudgeonI'd be glad to post a link to our press release. We endorsed Jennifer Mansfield because she is the best candidate in the race. She has served on wcpss committees, contributed to many school board and committee meetings, and been an officer in WSCA. Jennifer understands magnet issues better than most people, and is consulted for her expertise by school board members. She has earned the respect of many schools activists and is known as a thoughtful and balanced person.
Losurdo is a Republican.
...
Thu, 05/26/2011 - 23:10 — SideburnsAnd you never said you're endorsing her because you don't want more Republicans on the Board? Or that you don't care how supporting Mansfield will affect Hill's chance of being re-elected?
I said we're endorsing
Fri, 05/27/2011 - 21:58 — CaryCurmudgeonI said we're endorsing Jennifer Mansfield because she is the best candidate, period. As Bob pointed out, I also listed qualifications of both candidates.
Losurdo is a Republican.
Other than the fact that RM wants Losurdo as a pocket vote, are there any other reasons you are throwing yet another ally under the bus?